Oncologist and General Practitioner Perspectives of Shared Care for Colorectal Cancer Survivors: A Qualitative Study.

IF 3.5 2区医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY

Psycho‐Oncology Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI:10.1002/pon.70223

Karolina Lisy, Matthew Tieu, Claire Gore, Penelope Schofield, Raymond J Chan, Jon Emery, Andrew Martin, Richard De Abreu Lourenco, Michael Jefford

{"title":"Oncologist and General Practitioner Perspectives of Shared Care for Colorectal Cancer Survivors: A Qualitative Study.","authors":"Karolina Lisy, Matthew Tieu, Claire Gore, Penelope Schofield, Raymond J Chan, Jon Emery, Andrew Martin, Richard De Abreu Lourenco, Michael Jefford","doi":"10.1002/pon.70223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: There is a growing body of evidence to support shared survivorship care. The shared care of colorectal cancer survivors (SCORE) randomised controlled trial (RCT) demonstrated that shared care is an appropriate and cost-effective model. Understanding the perspectives of oncologists and general practitioners (GPs) who participated in SCORE will provide crucial insights to support wider implementation of shared care and adoption into clinical practice.Aims: To explore the experiences of oncologists and GPs who provided shared survivorship care for colorectal cancer survivors within the SCORE RCT, focussing on perceptions of acceptability and appropriateness of shared care, and facilitators and barriers to implementation.Methods: This qualitative descriptive study utilised semi-structured interviews for data collection. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and data analysed by hybrid deductive/inductive thematic analysis.Results: Interviews from 20 HCPs (13 GPs and 7 oncologists) were analysed. Seven themes were developed describing overall acceptance of the shared care model, the importance and challenges regarding bilateral communication between providers, mixed views on the need for GP training, and patients suitable for shared care. The need to support GPs with a direct hospital-based contact person, as well as clear guidance on their role, was emphasised, as was the need for care coordination and logistical support.Conclusions: Our study offers novel findings regarding shared care from the perspective of participants who have direct experience with delivering the model. While shared care was broadly supported by both GPs and specialists, successful implementation requires agreed-upon bilateral communication, clear guidance for GPs, and coordination support.Clinical trial registration: The Shared Care for Colorectal Cancer (SCORE) Trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617000004369p. Registered on 3 January 2017; protocol version 4 approved 24 February 2017.","PeriodicalId":20779,"journal":{"name":"Psycho‐Oncology","volume":"34 7","pages":"e70223"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12255378/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psycho‐Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.70223","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is a growing body of evidence to support shared survivorship care. The shared care of colorectal cancer survivors (SCORE) randomised controlled trial (RCT) demonstrated that shared care is an appropriate and cost-effective model. Understanding the perspectives of oncologists and general practitioners (GPs) who participated in SCORE will provide crucial insights to support wider implementation of shared care and adoption into clinical practice.

Aims: To explore the experiences of oncologists and GPs who provided shared survivorship care for colorectal cancer survivors within the SCORE RCT, focussing on perceptions of acceptability and appropriateness of shared care, and facilitators and barriers to implementation.

Methods: This qualitative descriptive study utilised semi-structured interviews for data collection. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and data analysed by hybrid deductive/inductive thematic analysis.

Results: Interviews from 20 HCPs (13 GPs and 7 oncologists) were analysed. Seven themes were developed describing overall acceptance of the shared care model, the importance and challenges regarding bilateral communication between providers, mixed views on the need for GP training, and patients suitable for shared care. The need to support GPs with a direct hospital-based contact person, as well as clear guidance on their role, was emphasised, as was the need for care coordination and logistical support.

Conclusions: Our study offers novel findings regarding shared care from the perspective of participants who have direct experience with delivering the model. While shared care was broadly supported by both GPs and specialists, successful implementation requires agreed-upon bilateral communication, clear guidance for GPs, and coordination support.

Clinical trial registration: The Shared Care for Colorectal Cancer (SCORE) Trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617000004369p. Registered on 3 January 2017; protocol version 4 approved 24 February 2017.

查看原文本刊更多论文

肿瘤学家和全科医生对结直肠癌幸存者共同护理的看法：一项定性研究。

背景：越来越多的证据支持共同的幸存者护理。结直肠癌幸存者共同护理（SCORE）随机对照试验（RCT）表明，共同护理是一种合适且具有成本效益的模式。了解参与SCORE的肿瘤学家和全科医生（gp）的观点将为支持在临床实践中更广泛地实施共享护理和采用提供至关重要的见解。目的：探讨在SCORE随机对照试验中为结直肠癌幸存者提供共享生存护理的肿瘤学家和全科医生的经验，重点关注共享护理的可接受性和适当性，以及实施的促进因素和障碍。方法：本定性描述性研究采用半结构化访谈进行数据收集。访谈记录和转录，并通过混合演绎/归纳主题分析分析数据。结果：对20名HCPs（13名全科医生和7名肿瘤学家）的访谈进行了分析。七个主题描述了共享护理模式的总体接受度，提供者之间双边沟通的重要性和挑战，对全科医生培训需求的不同看法，以及适合共享护理的患者。会议强调，有必要为全科医生提供直接的医院联络人，并就其作用提供明确指导，还需要进行护理协调和后勤支助。结论：我们的研究从参与者的角度提供了关于共享护理的新发现，他们有提供模型的直接经验。虽然共享医疗得到了全科医生和专家的广泛支持，但成功实施需要商定的双边沟通、对全科医生的明确指导和协调支持。临床试验注册：结直肠癌共享护理（SCORE）试验在澳大利亚新西兰临床试验注册中心注册，ACTRN12617000004369p。2017年1月3日注册；协议版本4于2017年2月24日批准。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Psycho‐Oncology 医学-心理学

CiteScore

6.30

自引率

8.30%

发文量

220

审稿时长

3-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Psycho-Oncology is concerned with the psychological, social, behavioral, and ethical aspects of cancer. This subspeciality addresses the two major psychological dimensions of cancer: the psychological responses of patients to cancer at all stages of the disease, and that of their families and caretakers; and the psychological, behavioral and social factors that may influence the disease process. Psycho-oncology is an area of multi-disciplinary interest and has boundaries with the major specialities in oncology: the clinical disciplines (surgery, medicine, pediatrics, radiotherapy), epidemiology, immunology, endocrinology, biology, pathology, bioethics, palliative care, rehabilitation medicine, clinical trials research and decision making, as well as psychiatry and psychology. This international journal is published twelve times a year and will consider contributions to research of clinical and theoretical interest. Topics covered are wide-ranging and relate to the psychosocial aspects of cancer and AIDS-related tumors, including: epidemiology, quality of life, palliative and supportive care, psychiatry, psychology, sociology, social work, nursing and educational issues. Special reviews are offered from time to time. There is a section reviewing recently published books. A society news section is available for the dissemination of information relating to meetings, conferences and other society-related topics. Summary proceedings of important national and international symposia falling within the aims of the journal are presented.