Cargando…

Correspondence between primary and secondary care about patients with cancer: A qualitative mixed‐methods analysis

Cancer care is complex and involves many different healthcare providers, especially during diagnosis and initial treatment, and it has been reported that both general practitioners and oncology specialists experience difficulties with interdisciplinary communication. The aim of this qualitative stud...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stegmann, Mariken E., Meijer, Jiska M., Nuver, Janine, Havenga, Klaas, Hiltermann, Thijo J.N., Maduro, John H., Schuling, Jan, Berendsen, Annette J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6588262/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30138956
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ecc.12903
Descripción
Sumario:Cancer care is complex and involves many different healthcare providers, especially during diagnosis and initial treatment, and it has been reported that both general practitioners and oncology specialists experience difficulties with interdisciplinary communication. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore information sharing between primary and secondary care for patients with lung, breast or colorectal cancer. A qualitative content analysis of 50 medical files (419 documents) was performed, which identified 70 correspondence‐related items. Six main topics were identified in most referral letters from primary to secondary care, but it was particularly notable that highly relevant information regarding the past medical history was often mixed with less relevant information. To lesser extents, the same held true for the medication list and presenting history. In the letters from specialists, nine topics were identified in most letters. Although information about actual treatment was always present, only limited detail, if any, was given about the intent of the treatment (curative or palliative) or the treatment alternatives. Interviews with nine healthcare providers confirmed these issues. These findings indicate that neither the initial referral nor the specialist correspondence is tailored to the needs of the recipient.