BACKGROUND: General Practitioners (GPs) play a key role in the healthcare trajectory of patients. If the patient experiences problems that are typically non-life-threatening, such as the symptoms of post-intensive-care syndrome, the GP will be the first healthcare professional they consult. The primary aim of this study is to gain insight in the frequency of GP consultations during the year before hospital admission and the year after discharge for ICU survivors and a matched control group from the general population. The secondary aim of this study is to gain insight into differences between subgroups of the ICU population with respect to the frequency of GP consultations.METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study, combining a national health insurance claims database and a national quality registry for ICUs. Clinical data of patients admitted to an ICU in 2013 were enriched with claims data from the years 2012, 2013 and 2014. Poisson regression was used to assess the differences in frequency of GP consultations between the ICU population and the control group.RESULTS: ICU patients have more consultations with GPs during the year before and after admission than individuals in the control group. In the last four weeks before admission, ICU patients have 3.58 (CI 3.37; 3.80) times more GP consultations than the control group, and during the first four weeks after discharge they have 4.98 (CI 4.74; 5.23) times more GP consultations. In the year after hospital discharge ICU survivors have an increased GP consultation rate compared to the year before their hospital admission.CONCLUSIONS: Close to hospital admission and shortly after hospital discharge, the frequency of GP consultations substantially increases in the population of ICU survivors. Even a year after hospital discharge, ICU survivors have increased GP consultation rates. Therefore, GPs should be well informed about the problems ICU patients suffer after discharge, in order to provide suitable follow-up care.
DOCUMENT
Introduction: Cancer survivors face physical, lifestyle, psychological, and psychosocial challenges. Despite the availability of aftercare services, survivors still have unmet needs. Digital aftercare programs may offer support, but their use is limited. This study aimed to examine what is needed to improve uptake and adoption of these programs. Additionally, it explored sociodemographic and clinical variables that may influence these needs. Methods: A mixed-methods approach was used, involving qualitative interviews and a questionnaire. The research was guided by the COM-B model of behaviour, which considers capability, opportunity, and motivation crucial for behaviour. Qualitative analysis was performed using the framework method. Statistical analyses involved descriptive statistics and regression analysis. Results: Fourteen cancer survivors were interviewed, and 213 participants completed the questionnaire. Findings indicated that most respondents had a positive or neutral attitude towards digital aftercare programs, believing these could address their cancer-related challenges. Still, only a small percentage had experience with them, and most were unaware of their existence. Many expressed a desire to be informed about them. Some were uncertain about their effectiveness. Others were concerned about a lack of reimbursement. No significant influence of the sociodemographic and clinical variables was found. Conclusion: Cancer survivors are generally positive about digital aftercare programs but are often unaware of their availability. Raising awareness, clarifying their value, and providing support and reimbursement could enhance uptake and adoption. Implications for Cancer Survivors: The current insights can help improve participation in digital aftercare programs, ultimately fostering health, well-being, and quality of life of cancer survivors.
MULTIFILE
PurposeCancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) following chemotherapy is commonly reported in breast cancer survivors, even years after treatment. Data from preclinical studies suggest that exercise during chemotherapy may prevent or diminish cognitive problems; however, clinical data are scarce.MethodsThis is a pragmatic follow-up study of two original randomized trials, which compares breast cancer patients randomized to exercise during chemotherapy to non-exercise controls 8.5 years post-treatment. Cognitive outcomes include an online neuropsychological test battery and self-reported cognitive complaints. Cognitive performance was compared to normative data and expressed as age-adjusted z-scores.ResultsA total of 143 patients participated in the online cognitive testing. Overall, cognitive performance was mildly impaired on some, but not all, cognitive domains, with no significant differences between groups. Clinically relevant cognitive impairment was present in 25% to 40% of all participants, regardless of study group. We observed no statistically significant effect of exercise, or being physically active during chemotherapy, on long-term cognitive performance or self-reported cognition, except for the task reaction time, which favored the control group (β = -2.04, 95% confidence interval: -38.48; -2.38). We observed no significant association between self-reported higher physical activity levels during chemotherapy or at follow-up and better cognitive outcomes.ConclusionIn this pragmatic follow-up study, exercising and being overall more physically active during or after adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer was not associated with better tested or self-reported cognitive functioning, on average, 8.5 years after treatment. Future prospective studies are needed to document the complex relationship between exercise and CRCI in cancer survivors.
MULTIFILE
