Display options
Share it on

Patient Prefer Adherence. 2017 Apr 10;11:731-742. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S127612. eCollection 2017.

Complexity of care and strategies of self-management in patients with colorectal cancer.

Patient preference and adherence

Dominik Ose, Eva C Winkler, Sarah Berger, Ines Baudendistel, Martina Kamradt, Felicitas Eckrich, Joachim Szecsenyi

Affiliations

  1. Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
  2. Department of Population Health, Health System Innovation and Research, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
  3. Program for Ethics and Patient-oriented Care in Oncology, National Centre for Tumour Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

PMID: 28435231 PMCID: PMC5391842 DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S127612

Abstract

PURPOSE: Given the inherent complexity of cancer care, in which personal, social, and clinical aspects accumulate and interact over time, self-management support need to become more comprehensive. This study has the following two aims: 1) to analyze and describe the complexity of individual patient situations and 2) to analyze and describe already established self-management strategies of patients to handle this complexity.

METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted. Ten focus groups were performed collecting perspectives of the following three user groups: patients with colorectal cancer (n=12) and representatives from support groups (n=2), physicians (n=17), and other health care professionals (HCPs; n=16). Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS: The results showed that cancer patients are struggling with the complexity of their individual situations characterized by the 1) "complexity of disease", 2) "complexity of care", and 3) "complexity of treatment-related data". To deal with these multifaceted situations, patients have established several individual strategies. These strategies are "proactive demanding" (eg, to get support and guidance or a meaningful dialog with the doctor), "proactive behavior" (eg, preparation of visits), and "proactive data management" (eg, in terms of merging treatment-related data and to disseminate these to their health care providers).

CONCLUSION: Patients with colorectal cancer have to handle a high complexity of individual situations within treatment and care of their disease. Private and social challenges have a culminating effect. This complexity increases as patients experience a longer duration of treatment and follow-up as patients have to handle a significantly higher amount of data over time. Self-management support should focus more on the individual complexity in a patient's life. This includes assisting patients with strategies that have already been established by themselves (like preparation of visits).

Keywords: chronic care; colorectal cancer; complexity; health care utilization; health services research; self-management

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

References

  1. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2017 Mar;26(2):null - PubMed
  2. Lancet. 2014 Sep 13;384(9947):980-1004 - PubMed
  3. Ann Fam Med. 2003 May-Jun;1(1):15-21 - PubMed
  4. J Gen Intern Med. 2007 Dec;22 Suppl 3:382-90 - PubMed
  5. Chronic Illn. 2005 Dec;1(4):315-20 - PubMed
  6. Chronic Illn. 2007 Jun;3(2):167-75 - PubMed
  7. Psychooncology. 2016 May;25(5):574-81 - PubMed
  8. Fam Pract. 2015 Dec;32(6):686-93 - PubMed
  9. PLoS One. 2016 May 12;11(5):e0155434 - PubMed
  10. BMJ. 2000 Jan 8;320(7227):114-6 - PubMed
  11. Int J Cancer. 2015 Jun 1;136(11):2649-58 - PubMed
  12. Ann Behav Med. 2003 Aug;26(1):1-7 - PubMed
  13. Psychooncology. 2010 Sep;19(9):909-22 - PubMed
  14. Lancet. 2001 Aug 11;358(9280):483-8 - PubMed
  15. Support Care Cancer. 2015 Jun;23(6):1679-88 - PubMed
  16. Cancer Nurs. 2015 Mar-Apr;38(2):E10-26 - PubMed
  17. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012 Oct;65(10):1041-51 - PubMed
  18. Lancet. 2014 Sep 13;384(9947):957-79 - PubMed
  19. Med J Aust. 2008 Nov 17;189(10 Suppl):S9-S13 - PubMed
  20. Health Expect. 2014 Aug;17(4):565-78 - PubMed
  21. Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Jan;100(1):37-49 - PubMed
  22. BMC Public Health. 2013 May 07;13:452 - PubMed
  23. JMIR Hum Factors. 2016 Oct 18;3(2):e25 - PubMed
  24. J Behav Med. 2016 Dec;39(6):981-994 - PubMed
  25. BMJ. 1995 Jul 29;311(7000):299-302 - PubMed
  26. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016 Oct 03;10 :2021-2029 - PubMed
  27. Eur J Public Health. 2014 Aug;24(4):679-84 - PubMed
  28. J Med Internet Res. 2015 May 21;17(5):e121 - PubMed
  29. Br J Cancer. 2011 Nov 8;105 Suppl 1:S21-8 - PubMed
  30. Health Soc Care Community. 1999 Mar;7(2):120-128 - PubMed
  31. Ann Oncol. 2012 Feb;23(2):472-9 - PubMed
  32. Patient Educ Couns. 2016 Nov;99(11):1759-1771 - PubMed
  33. Int J Nurs Stud. 2014 Aug;51(8):1083-92 - PubMed
  34. Lancet Oncol. 2006 Nov;7(11):935-43 - PubMed
  35. Nurse Educ Today. 2004 Feb;24(2):105-12 - PubMed
  36. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2013 Dec;27(12):697-706 - PubMed
  37. Int Nurs Rev. 2011 Sep;58(3):288-95 - PubMed
  38. Br J Cancer. 2011 Nov 8;105 Suppl 1:S1-4 - PubMed
  39. Support Care Cancer. 2015 Sep;23(9):2613-21 - PubMed
  40. J Cancer Surviv. 2016 Feb;10(1):206-19 - PubMed
  41. Cancer Detect Prev. 2007;31(3):199-206 - PubMed
  42. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011 Jan-Feb;61(1):50-62 - PubMed
  43. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2010;2010(40):18-24 - PubMed
  44. J Cancer Surviv. 2016 Dec;10 (6):1012-1034 - PubMed
  45. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2012 Jun;44(2):136-44 - PubMed
  46. Int J Nurs Stud. 2015 Mar;52(3):727-43 - PubMed

Publication Types