Cargando…

Major differences in follow-up practice of patients with colorectal cancer; results of a national survey in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND: The precise content and frequency of follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) is variable and guideline adherence is low. The aim of this study was to assess the view of colorectal surgeons on their local follow-up schedule and to clarify their opinions about risk-stratificatio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Qaderi, S. M., Wijffels, N. A. T., Bremers, A. J. A., de Wilt, J. H. W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6945647/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31906899
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-019-6509-0
_version_ 1783485223751647232
author Qaderi, S. M.
Wijffels, N. A. T.
Bremers, A. J. A.
de Wilt, J. H. W.
author_facet Qaderi, S. M.
Wijffels, N. A. T.
Bremers, A. J. A.
de Wilt, J. H. W.
author_sort Qaderi, S. M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The precise content and frequency of follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) is variable and guideline adherence is low. The aim of this study was to assess the view of colorectal surgeons on their local follow-up schedule and to clarify their opinions about risk-stratification and organ preserving therapies. Equally important, adherence to the Dutch national guidelines was determined. METHODS: Colorectal surgeons were invited to complete a web-based survey about the importance and interval of clinical follow-up, CEA monitoring and the use of imaging modalities. Furthermore, the opinions regarding physical examination, risk-stratification, organ preserving strategies, and follow-up setting were assessed. Data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative analysis methods. RESULTS: A total of 106 colorectal surgeons from 52 general and 5 university hospitals filled in the survey, yielding a hospital response rate of 74% and a surgeon response rate of 42%. The follow-up of patients with CRC was mainly done by surgeons (71%). The majority of the respondents (68%) did not routinely perform physical examination during follow-up of rectal patients. Abdominal ultrasound was the predominant modality used for detection of liver metastases (77%). Chest X-ray was the main modality for detecting lung metastases (69%). During the first year of follow-up, adherence to the minimal guideline recommendations was high (99–100%). The results demonstrate that, within the framework of the guidelines, some respondents applied a more intensive follow-up and others a less intensive schedule. The majority of the respondents (77%) applied one single follow-up imaging schedule for all patients that underwent treatment with curative intent. CONCLUSIONS: Dutch colorectal surgeons’ adherence to minimal guideline recommendations was high, but within the guideline framework, opinions differed about the required intensity and content of clinical visits, the interval of CEA monitoring, and the importance and frequency of imaging techniques. This national survey demonstrates current follow-up practice throughout the Netherlands and highlights the follow-up differences of curatively treated patients with CRC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6945647
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69456472020-01-07 Major differences in follow-up practice of patients with colorectal cancer; results of a national survey in the Netherlands Qaderi, S. M. Wijffels, N. A. T. Bremers, A. J. A. de Wilt, J. H. W. BMC Cancer Research Article BACKGROUND: The precise content and frequency of follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) is variable and guideline adherence is low. The aim of this study was to assess the view of colorectal surgeons on their local follow-up schedule and to clarify their opinions about risk-stratification and organ preserving therapies. Equally important, adherence to the Dutch national guidelines was determined. METHODS: Colorectal surgeons were invited to complete a web-based survey about the importance and interval of clinical follow-up, CEA monitoring and the use of imaging modalities. Furthermore, the opinions regarding physical examination, risk-stratification, organ preserving strategies, and follow-up setting were assessed. Data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative analysis methods. RESULTS: A total of 106 colorectal surgeons from 52 general and 5 university hospitals filled in the survey, yielding a hospital response rate of 74% and a surgeon response rate of 42%. The follow-up of patients with CRC was mainly done by surgeons (71%). The majority of the respondents (68%) did not routinely perform physical examination during follow-up of rectal patients. Abdominal ultrasound was the predominant modality used for detection of liver metastases (77%). Chest X-ray was the main modality for detecting lung metastases (69%). During the first year of follow-up, adherence to the minimal guideline recommendations was high (99–100%). The results demonstrate that, within the framework of the guidelines, some respondents applied a more intensive follow-up and others a less intensive schedule. The majority of the respondents (77%) applied one single follow-up imaging schedule for all patients that underwent treatment with curative intent. CONCLUSIONS: Dutch colorectal surgeons’ adherence to minimal guideline recommendations was high, but within the guideline framework, opinions differed about the required intensity and content of clinical visits, the interval of CEA monitoring, and the importance and frequency of imaging techniques. This national survey demonstrates current follow-up practice throughout the Netherlands and highlights the follow-up differences of curatively treated patients with CRC. BioMed Central 2020-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6945647/ /pubmed/31906899 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-019-6509-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Qaderi, S. M.
Wijffels, N. A. T.
Bremers, A. J. A.
de Wilt, J. H. W.
Major differences in follow-up practice of patients with colorectal cancer; results of a national survey in the Netherlands
title Major differences in follow-up practice of patients with colorectal cancer; results of a national survey in the Netherlands
title_full Major differences in follow-up practice of patients with colorectal cancer; results of a national survey in the Netherlands
title_fullStr Major differences in follow-up practice of patients with colorectal cancer; results of a national survey in the Netherlands
title_full_unstemmed Major differences in follow-up practice of patients with colorectal cancer; results of a national survey in the Netherlands
title_short Major differences in follow-up practice of patients with colorectal cancer; results of a national survey in the Netherlands
title_sort major differences in follow-up practice of patients with colorectal cancer; results of a national survey in the netherlands
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6945647/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31906899
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-019-6509-0
work_keys_str_mv AT qaderism majordifferencesinfollowuppracticeofpatientswithcolorectalcancerresultsofanationalsurveyinthenetherlands
AT wijffelsnat majordifferencesinfollowuppracticeofpatientswithcolorectalcancerresultsofanationalsurveyinthenetherlands
AT bremersaja majordifferencesinfollowuppracticeofpatientswithcolorectalcancerresultsofanationalsurveyinthenetherlands
AT dewiltjhw majordifferencesinfollowuppracticeofpatientswithcolorectalcancerresultsofanationalsurveyinthenetherlands