Effectiveness of a guided online primary care intervention for fear of cancer recurrence: A randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Fear of Cancer Recurrence (FCR) is highly prevalent among cancer survivors and leads to decreased quality of life and increased healthcare costs. We assessed the effectiveness of a guided online primary care intervention for FCR, compared to waiting list. METHODS: In this RCT, participants were recruited online and randomised 1:1. All adults who finished successful curative cancer treatment between 3 months and 10 years ago, wanted support for FCR, and had sufficient Dutch skills were eligible. The intervention consisted of a 10-week online programme and three to five video calling sessions with a trained mental health worker. After 6 months, the control group received the same intervention. The primary outcome was the difference between the groups in the change in FCR severity from baseline (T0) to 6 months (T2), measured online with the short form of the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-three participants were enroled and randomised to the intervention (n = 86) or control group (n = 87). FCR severity dropped 2.1 points more in the intervention group than in the control group (2.7 points (SD = 3.9) versus 0.6 points (SD = 3.6), t(154) = 3.4, p = 0.0007). General mental well-being also improved significantly in the intervention group and remained stable in the control group. These improvements remained at 10 months follow up. CONCLUSIONS: This easily accessible and relatively inexpensive intervention effectively reduces FCR and has potential to replace or precede existing more intensive psychological treatments, improving patients' access to care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was prospectively registered in the Netherlands Trial Register on 25-02-2019 with number NL7573.

Barriers and facilitators for the implementation of the CombiConsultation by general practitioners, pharmacists and practice nurses: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: The CombiConsultation is a consultation with the pharmacist for patients with a chronic condition, aligned with the periodic consultation with the practice nurse or general practitioner. Implementation requires adjustments in the working methods of these healthcare providers and therefore behavioural changes. AIM: The aim of this study was to identify the barriers and facilitators that determine the behavioural changes by pharmacists, general practitioners and practice nurses required for the implementation of the CombiConsultation. METHOD: Ten community pharmacists, 5 practice nurses and 5 general practitioners were sampled from practices enrolled in the CombiConsultation study. Their views regarding the implementation of this clinical pharmacy service were explored using interviews based on the 14 domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which are linked to the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour-model. Barriers and facilitators in the domains were assessed by content analysis. RESULTS: Twelve barriers and 23 facilitators were found within 13 TDF domains with high agreement between the healthcare providers. Important facilitators for implementation were the pharmacists' expertise in pharmacotherapy (capability), access to medical data and physical proximity between professional practices (opportunity). Barriers were pharmacists' insufficient consultation- and clinical-reasoning skills (capability), insufficient staff (opportunity) and reimbursement and lack of coordination among all involved healthcare providers (motivation). CONCLUSION: All healthcare providers are motivated to implement the CombiConsultation. An existing collaborative practice, with a clear and accepted professional role of the pharmacist is essential. Training of pharmacists in consultation and clinical-reasoning skills can be beneficial, as well as arrangements on the consultation logistics, and reimbursement.

The CombiConsultation for patients with diabetes, COPD and cardiovascular diseases: Evaluation of interventions and personal health-related goals.

BACKGROUND: The CombiConsultation is a consultation with the community pharmacist for patients with diabetes, COPD and/or cardiovascular disease (CVD), aligned with the annual or quarterly consultation with the practice nurse (PN) or general practitioner (GP). The consultation is focused on the personal health-related goals of the patient. OBJECTIVES: To assess the number and types of personal health-related goals, drug-related problems (DRPs) and interventions identified by pharmacists during a CombiConsultation and to investigate which patients can benefit most from such consultation. METHOD: Twenty-one Dutch community pharmacies and associated GP practices were included in the CombiConsultation study. CombiConsultations were performed, involving patients with diabetes, COPD and/or (at risk of) CVD. The pharmacists set health-related goals together with the patients and identified DRPs. The number and types of personal health-related goals, DRPs and interventions were analysed. Associations between patient characteristics and the identification of at least one DRP were analysed by multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: In 834 patients (49% men, mean age: 70 years), 939 DRPs were identified, mostly (potential) side effects (33%), undertreatment (18%) and overtreatment (14%). In 71% of the patients, one or more DRPs were found, with a median of one DRP per patient. Pharmacists proposed 935 recommendations, of which 72% were implemented. DRPs were found more often in patients using a higher number of drugs for chronic conditions. A total of 425 personal health-related goals were set, of which 53% were (partially) attained. CONCLUSION: The CombiConsultation can be used as a compact health service contributing to safe and effective use of medication for patients with diabetes, COPD and/or (at risk of) CVD, also in patients under 65 or with less than 5 medications in use. The output of the CombiConsultation reflects its characteristics.

Impact of the COVID-19 Outbreak-Delayed Referral of Colorectal and Lung Cancer in Primary Care: A National Retrospective Cohort Study.

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak impacted health care. We investigated its impact on the time to referral and diagnosis for symptomatic cancer patients in The Netherlands. We performed a national retrospective cohort study utilizing primary care records linked to The Netherlands Cancer Registry. For patients with symptomatic colorectal, lung, breast, or melanoma cancer, we manually explored free and coded texts to determine the durations of the primary care (IPC) and secondary care (ISC) diagnostic intervals during the first COVID-19 wave and pre-COVID-19. We found that the median IPC duration increased for colorectal cancer from 5 days (Interquartile Range (IQR) 1-29 days) pre-COVID-19 to 44 days (IQR 6-230, p < 0.01) during the first COVID-19 wave, and for lung cancer, the duration increased from 15 days (IQR) 3-47) to 41 days (IQR 7-102, p < 0.01). For breast cancer and melanoma, the change in IPC duration was negligible. The median ISC duration only increased for breast cancer, from 3 (IQR 2-7) to 6 days (IQR 3-9, p < 0.01). For colorectal cancer, lung cancer, and melanoma, the median ISC durations were 17.5 (IQR (9-52), 18 (IQR 7-40), and 9 (IQR 3-44) days, respectively, similar to pre-COVID-19 results. In conclusion, for colorectal and lung cancer, the time to primary care referral was substantially prolonged during the first COVID-19 wave. In such crises, targeted primary care support is needed to maintain effective cancer diagnosis.

Cluster analysis of functional independence in community-dwelling older people.

BACKGROUND: The concept of Functional Independence (FI), defined as 'functioning physically safe and independent from other persons, within one's context", plays an important role in maintaining the functional ability to enable well-being in older age. FI is a dynamic and complex concept covering four clinical outcomes: physical capacity, empowerment, coping flexibility, and health literacy. As the level of FI differs widely between older adults, healthcare professionals must gain insight into how to best support older people in maintaining their level of FI in a personalized manner. Insight into subgroups of FI could be a first step in providing personalized support This study aims to identify clinically relevant, distinct subgroups of FI in Dutch community-dwelling older people and subsequently describe them according to individual characteristics. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-three community-dwelling older persons were included for participation. Cluster analysis identified four distinctive clusters: (1) Performers - Well-informed; this subgroup is physically strong, well-informed and educated, independent, non-falling, with limited reflective coping style. (2) Performers - Achievers: physically strong people with a limited coping style and health literacy level. (3) The reliant- Good Coper representing physically somewhat limited people with sufficient coping styles who receive professional help. (4) The reliant - Receivers: physically limited people with insufficient coping styles who receive professional help. These subgroups showed significant differences in demographic characteristics and clinical FI outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Community-dwelling older persons can be allocated to four distinct and clinically relevant subgroups based on their level of FI. This subgrouping provides insight into the complex holistic concept of FI by pointing out for each subgroup which FI domain is affected. This way, it helps to better target interventions to prevent the decline of FI in the community-dwelling older population.

Patient-reported needs for coping with worry or fear about cancer recurrence and the extent to which they are being met: a survey study.

PURPOSE: Many cancer patients and survivors experience fear or worry about cancer recurrence (FCR). Evidence suggests support for FCR is their largest unmet need. We aimed to assess which types of support are needed, which providers are preferred and to what extent patients' needs are being met. METHODS: Together with the Dutch Federation of Cancer Patient Organisations (NFK), a purpose-designed questionnaire was distributed online via e-mail, newsletters and social media. All questions were multiple choice or Likert scales, except for an open-ended question about the preferred provider of care. RESULTS: Out of 5323 respondents, 4511 had experienced FCR and were included. Among them, 94% indicated a need for support. The required types of support that were reported the most were talking about FCR (69%), enjoyable activities for distraction (56%) and psychological help or coaching (40%). On average, younger respondents and women wanted more support than older respondents and men. Eighty-five percent of respondents received at least one type of support they wanted. Practical tips about FCR and additional medical check-ups were most often missed. Social contacts provided an important part of support, especially with talking and distracting activities. For other types of support, respondents usually preferred professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Almost all patients who experience FCR have a need for support. Even though most receive some support, several gaps remain. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Many report an unmet need for psychological help or practical tips about FCR. We recommend for healthcare providers to discuss FCR with patients and inform them about the support available.

The Impact of the COVID Pandemic on the Incidence of Presentations with Cancer-Related Symptoms in Primary Care.

Introduction: In the Netherlands, the onset of the coronavirus pandemic saw shifts in primary health service provision away from physical consultations, cancer-screening programs were temporarily halted, and government messaging focused on remaining at home. In March and April 2020, weekly cancer diagnoses decreased to 73% of their pre-COVID levels, and 39% for skin cancer. This study aims to explore the effect of the COVID pandemic on patient presentations for cancer-related symptoms in primary care in The Netherlands. Methods: Retrospective cohort study using routine clinical primary care data. Monthly incidences of patient presentations for cancer-related symptoms in five clinical databases in The Netherlands were analysed from March 2018 to February 2021. Results: Data demonstrated reductions in the incidence of cancer-related symptom presentations to primary care during the first COVID wave (March-June 2020) of -34% (95% CI: -43 to -23%) for all symptoms combined. In the second wave (October 2020-February 2021) there was no change in incidence observed (-8%, 95% CI -20% to 6%). Alarm-symptoms demonstrated decreases in incidence in the first wave with subsequent incidences that continued to rise in the second wave, such as: first wave: breast lump -17% (95% CI: -27 to -6%) and haematuria -15% (95% CI -24% to -6%); and second wave: rectal bleeding +14% (95% CI: 0 to 30%) and breast lump +14% (95% CI: 2 to 27%). Presentations of common non-alarm symptom such as tiredness and naevus demonstrated decreased in-cidences in the first wave of 45% (95% CI: -55% to -33%) and 37% (95% CI -47% to -25%). In the second wave, tiredness incidence was reduced by 20% (95% CI: -33% to -3%). Subgroup analy-sis did not demonstrate difference in incidence according to sex, age groups, comorbidity status, or previous history of cancer. Conclusions: These data describe large-scale primary care avoidance that did not increase until the end of the first COVID year for many cancer-related symptoms, suggestive that substantial numbers of patients delayed presenting to primary care. For those patients who had underlying cancer, this may have had impacted the cancer stage at diagnosis, treatment, and mortality.

Mental Health Morbidities and Time to Cancer Diagnosis Among Adults With Colon Cancer in England.

Importance: Mental health morbidity (MHM) in patients presenting with possible cancer symptoms may be associated with prediagnostic care and time to cancer diagnosis. Objective: To compare the length of intervals to cancer diagnosis by preexisting MHM status in patients who presented with symptoms of as-yet-undiagnosed colon cancer and evaluate their risk of emergency cancer diagnosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was conducted using linked primary care data obtained from the population-based Clinical Practice Research Datalink, which includes primary care practices in England, linked to cancer registry and hospital data. Included participants were 3766 patients diagnosed with colon cancer between 2011 and 2015 presenting with cancer-relevant symptoms up to 24 months before their diagnosis. Data analysis was performed in January 2021 to April 2022. Exposures: Mental health conditions recorded in primary care before cancer diagnosis, including anxiety, depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, alcohol addiction, anorexia, and bulimia. Main Outcomes and Measures: Fast-track (also termed 2-week wait) specialist referral for investigations, time to colonoscopy and cancer diagnosis, and risk of emergency cancer diagnosis. Results: Among 3766 patients with colon cancer (median [IQR] age, 75 [65-82] years; 1911 [50.7%] women ), 623 patients [16.5%] had preexisting MHM recorded in primary care the year before cancer diagnosis, including 562 patients (14.9%) with preexisting anxiety or depression (accounting for 90.2% of patients with preexisting MHM) and 61 patients (1.6%) with other MHM; 3143 patients (83.5%) did not have MHM. Patients with MHM had records of red-flag symptoms or signs (ie, rectal bleeding, change in bowel habit, or anemia) in the 24 months before cancer diagnosis in a smaller proportion compared with patients without MHM (308 patients [49.4%] vs 1807 patients [57.5%]; P < .001). Even when red-flag symptoms were recorded, patients with MHM had lower odds of fast-track specialist referral (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55-0.94; P = .01). Among 2115 patients with red-flag symptoms or signs, 308 patients with MHM experienced a more than 2-fold longer median (IQR) time to cancer diagnosis (326 [75-552] days vs 133 [47-422] days) and higher odds of emergency diagnosis (90 patients [29.2%] vs 327 patients [18.1%]; adjusted OR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.23-2.24; P < .001) compared with 1807 patients without MHM. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that patients with MHM experienced large and prognostically consequential disparities in diagnostic care before a colon cancer diagnosis. These findings suggest that appropriate pathways and follow-up strategies after symptomatic presentation are needed for earlier cancer diagnoses and improved health outcomes in this large patient group.

The evolution and co-evolution of a primary care cancer research network: From academic social connection to research collaboration.

Academic networks are expected to enhance scientific collaboration and thereby increase research outputs. However, little is known about whether and how the initial steps of getting to know other researchers translates into effective collaborations. In this paper, we investigate the evolution and co-evolution of an academic social network and a collaborative research network (using co-authorship as a proxy measure of the latter), and simultaneously examine the effect of individual researcher characteristics (e.g. gender, seniority or workplace) on their evolving relationships. We used longitudinal data from an international network in primary care cancer research: the CanTest Collaborative (CanTest). Surveys were distributed amongst CanTest researchers to map who knows who (the 'academic social network'). Co-authorship relations were derived from Scopus (the 'collaborative network'). Stochastic actor-oriented models were employed to investigate the evolution and co-evolution of both networks. Visualizing the development of the CanTest network revealed that researchers within CanTest get to know each other quickly and also start collaborating over time (evolution of the academic social network and collaborative network respectively). Results point to a stable and solid academic social network that is particularly encouraging towards more junior researchers; yet differing for male and female researchers (the effect of individual researcher characteristics). Moreover, although the academic social network and the research collaborations do not grow at the same pace, the benefit of creating academic social relationships to stimulate effective research collaboration is clearly demonstrated (co-evolution of both networks).

What is the prevalence of fear of cancer recurrence in cancer survivors and patients? A systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Care for fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is considered the most common unmet need among cancer survivors. Yet the prevalence of FCR and predisposing factors remain inconclusive. To support targeted care, we provide a comprehensive overview of the prevalence and severity of FCR among cancer survivors and patients, as measured using the short form of the validated Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory (FCRI-SF). We also report on associations between FCR and clinical and demographic characteristics. METHODS: This is a systematic review and individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis on the prevalence of FCR. In the review, we included all studies that used the FCRI-SF with adult (≥18 years) cancer survivors and patients. Date of search: 7 February 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. RESULTS: IPD were requested from 87 unique studies and provided for 46 studies comprising 11,226 participants from 13 countries. 9311 respondents were included for the main analyses. On the FCRI-SF (range 0-36), 58.8% of respondents scored ≥13, 45.1% scored ≥16 and 19.2% scored ≥22. FCR decreased with age and women reported more FCR than men. FCR was found across cancer types and continents and for all time periods since cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: FCR affects a considerable number of cancer survivors and patients. It is therefore important that healthcare providers discuss this issue with their patients and provide treatment when needed. Further research is needed to investigate how best to prevent and treat FCR and to identify other factors associated with FCR. The protocol was prospectively registered (PROSPERO CRD42020142185).

Factors determining development of researchers within a research network on cancer diagnosis in primary care (CanTest): an interview study.

OBJECTIVES: Developing connections with other researchers in a network, learning informally through these connections and using them to reach goals, is expected to increase research capacity and strengthen performance. So far, this has not been empirically demonstrated. We assessed what and how network collaboration adds to development of researchers. DESIGN: Exploratory qualitative study using semistructured online interviews, analysed by inductive and deductive methods. For the deductive analysis, an existing value creation framework to study informal learning in networks was used and adjusted to our context. SETTING: The CanTest Collaborative-an international team of primary care cancer researchers working on early detection and diagnosis of cancer. PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen primary care cancer researchers. RESULTS: Connections with other researchers in an international network created diverse value cycles, where most outcomes were in the potential value cycle, acquiring knowledge, skills, social capital, resources and ideas. Not all potential value will be applied but many interviewees described realised as well as transformational value. In our context, the transformational value from the framework appeared to be related to other perspectives on the research process. Advancement of the network depends on opportunities, timing, role models and connections between different perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: Focus on the factors that are relevant for network advancement will support researchers in early detection and diagnosis of cancer research patients who participate in an international network and bring sustainable change in this domain. When, subsequently, researchers in the CanTest network bring about more realised and transformational learning outcomes, this will contribute to capacity development.

The effect of shared decision-making on recovery from non-chronic aspecific low back pain in primary care; a post-hoc analysis from the patient, physician and observer perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Although shared decision-making (SDM) is increasingly accepted in healthcare and has demonstrated merits for several psychological outcomes, the effect on recovery from somatic conditions is still subject to debate. The objective of this study is to measure the effect of SDM on recovery from non-chronic aspecific low back pain (LBP). METHODS: This study is a post-hoc analysis of data from a cluster-randomised trial that evaluated the effectiveness of SDM on recovery in patients with non-chronic aspecific LBP. In this analysis, we re-evaluate the impact of SDM from three perspectives: that of external observers, participating GPs and participating patients. Recovery was measured with the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain and with the Roland Morris Disability questionnaire (RMD) and defined as a VAS < 30 and an RMD < 4. Logistic regression was used to analyse the effect of SDM on recovery at 6 and 26 weeks. RESULTS: At 26 weeks, 105 (74%) of all 176 included patients had recovered. No significant effect of SDM on recovery at 6 or 26 weeks after the consultation was found when considering SDM from an observer perspective or a patient perspective. From a GP perspective SDM had a significant effect on recovery, but at 26 weeks only, and with the lowest probability of recovery observed at a medium level of GP-perceived SDM. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that SDM as perceived by the patient or by external observation improves recovery from non-chronic aspecific low back pain. The long-term recovery may be better for patients in whom the GP perceives SDM during their consultations. Further research should highlight the hierarchy and the relation between the perspectives, which is needed to come to an integral effect evaluation of SDM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Netherlands National Trial Register (NTR) number: NTR1960 .

Do presenting symptoms, use of pre-diagnostic endoscopy and risk of emergency cancer diagnosis vary by comorbidity burden and type in patients with colorectal cancer?

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients often have pre-existing comorbidities, which can influence timeliness of cancer diagnosis. We examined symptoms, investigations and emergency presentation (EP) risk among colorectal cancer (CRC) patients by comorbidity status. METHODS: Using linked cancer registration, primary care and hospital records of 4836 CRC patients (2011-2015), and multivariate quantile and logistic regression, we examined variations in specialist investigations, diagnostic intervals and EP risk. RESULTS: Among colon cancer patients, 46% had at least one pre-existing hospital-recorded comorbidity, most frequently cardiovascular disease (CVD, 18%). Comorbid versus non-comorbid cancer patients more frequently had records of anaemia (43% vs 38%), less frequently rectal bleeding/change in bowel habit (20% vs 27%), and longer intervals from symptom-to-first relevant test (median 136 vs 74 days). Comorbid patients were less likely investigated with colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, independently of symptoms (adjusted OR = 0.7[0.6, 0.9] for Charlson comorbidity score 1-2 and OR = 0.5 [0.4-0.7] for score 3+ versus 0. EP risk increased with comorbidity score 0, 1, 2, 3+: 23%, 35%, 33%, 47%; adjusted OR = 1.8 [1.4, 2.2]; 1.7 [1.3, 2.3]; 3.0 [2.3, 4.0]) and for patients with CVD (adjusted OR = 2.0 [1.5, 2.5]). CONCLUSIONS: Comorbid individuals with as-yet-undiagnosed CRC often present with general rather than localising symptoms and are less likely promptly investigated with colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy. Comorbidity is a risk factor for diagnostic delay and has potential, additionally to symptoms, as risk-stratifier for prioritising patients needing prompt assessment to reduce EP.

The CombiConsultation: a new concept of sequential consultation with the pharmacist and practice nurse/general practitioner for patients with a chronic condition.

The primary health care system is generally well organized for dealing with chronic diseases, but comprehensive medication management is still a challenge. Studies suggest that pharmacists can contribute to effective and safe drug therapy by providing services like a clinical medication review (CMR). However, several factors limit the potential impact of a CMR. Therefore, we propose a new pharmaceutical care service for patients with a chronic condition: the CombiConsultation. The CombiConsultation is a medication evaluation service conducted by the (community) pharmacist and either the practice nurse or general practitioner. It consists of 3 steps: medication check, implementation and follow-up. The pharmacist primarily focusses on setting treatment goals for 1 or 2 drug-related problems in relation to a specific chronic condition. In this manuscript we describe the process and characteristics of the CombiConsultation. We compare the CombiConsultation with the CMR and explain the choices made and the implications for implementation.

Cancer detection during the COVID-19 pandemic-Experiences in primary care and recommendations for the future.

Background: To describe general practitioners (GPs) experiences with the impact COVID-19 on the duration of cancer detection. Methods: Cross-sectional survey study among Dutch GPs. Results: Fifty-eight GPs participated. During the first wave, COVID-19-related delays were experienced by 88%, 52%, and 67% of GPs in the contact-seeking, primary care, and referral phases, respectively. GPs reported delays due to telehealth consultations, longer waiting times and patient's concerns of COVID infections and overburdening GPs. Conclusions: The majority of GPs experienced delays in cancer diagnostic processes during the beginning of the COVID pandemic, which was most prominent in the timeliness in which patients sought GP care.

Impact of organizational context on patient outcomes in a proactive primary care program:a longitudinal observational study.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of health care interventions is co-determined by contextual factors. Unknown is the extent of this impact on patient outcomes. Therefore, the aim of this study is to explore which characteristics of general practices are associated with patient outcomes in a proactive primary care program, the U-PROFIT 2.0. METHODS: A longitudinal observational study was conducted from January 2016 till October 2017. Two questionnaires were send out, one to collect characteristics of general practices such as practice neighbourhood socio-economic status, general practice versus healthcare centre (involving multiple primary care professionals), and professional- frail older patient ratio per practice of general practitioners and practice nurses. Regarding delivering the program, the practice or district nurse who delivered the program, number of years since the start of the implementation, and choice of age threshold for frailty screening were collected. Patient outcomes collected by the second questionnaire and send to frail patients were daily functioning, hospital admissions, emergency department visits, and general practice out-of-hours consultations. Linear and generalized linear mixed models were used. RESULTS: A total of 827 frail older people were included at baseline. Delivery of the program by a district nurse compared to a practice nurse was significantly associated with a decrease in daily functioning on patient-level (ß = 2.19; P = < 0.001). Duration since implementation of 3 years compared to 9 years was significantly associated with less out-of-hours consultations to a general practice (OR 0.11; P = 0.001). Applying frailty screening from the age of 75 compared to those targeted from the age of 60 showed a significant increase in emergency visits (OR 5.26; P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Three associations regarding the organizational context 1) the nurse who delivered the program, 2) the number of years the program was implemented and 3) the age threshold for defining a frail patient are significant and clinically relevant for frail patients that receive a proactive primary care program. In general, contextual factors need more attention when implementing complex primary care programs which can result in better balanced choices to enhance effective proactive care for older people living in the community.

Patients' preferred and perceived level of involvement in decision making for cancer treatment: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Patient involvement in decision making is conditional for personalised treatment decisions. We aim to provide an up-to-date overview of patients' preferred and perceived level of involvement in decision making for cancer treatment. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL for articles published between January 2009 and January 2020. Search terms were 'decision making', 'patient participation', 'oncology', 'perception' and 'treatment'. Inclusion criteria were: written in English, peer-reviewed, reporting patients' preferred and perceived level of involvement, including adult cancer patients and concerning decision making for cancer treatment. The percentages of patients preferring and perceiving an active, shared or passive decision role and the (dis)concordance are presented. Quality assessment was performed with a modified version of the New-Castle Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: 31 studies were included. The median percentage of patients preferring an active, shared or passive role in decision making was respectively 25%, 46%, and 27%. The median percentage of patients perceiving an active, shared or passive role was respectively 27%, 39%, and 34%. The median concordance in preferred and perceived role of all studies was 70%. Disconcordance was highest for a shared role; 42%. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' preferences for involvement in cancer treatment decision vary widely. A significant number of patients perceived a decisional role other than preferred. Improvements in patient involvement have been observed in the last decade. However, there is still room for improvement and physicians should explore patients' preferences for involvement in decision making in order to truly deliver personalised cancer care.

Characteristics and motives of non-responders in a stepwise cardiometabolic disease prevention program in primary care.

BACKGROUND: A high response rate is an important condition for effective prevention programs. We aimed at gaining insight into the characteristics and motives of non-responders in different stages of a stepwise prevention program for cardiometabolic diseases (CMD) in primary care. METHODS: We performed a non-response analysis within a randomized controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of a stepwise CMD prevention program in the Netherlands. Patients between 45 and 70 years without known CMD were invited for stage 1 of the program, completing a CMD risk score. Patients with an increased risk were advised to visit their general practice for additional measurements, stage 2 of the program. We analyzed determinants of non-response using data from the risk score, electronic medical records, questionnaires and Statistics Netherlands. RESULTS: Non-response in stage 1 was associated with a younger age, male sex, a migration background, a low prosperity score, self-employment, being single and having lower consultations rates in general practice. Non-response in stage 2 was associated with a low prosperity score, being employed, having no chronic illness, smoking, a normal waist circumference, a negative family history for cardiovascular disease or diabetes and having a lower consultation rate. More than half of the non-responders in stage 2 reported not visiting the GP because they did not expect to have any CMD, despite their increased risk. CONCLUSIONS: To achieve a larger and more equal uptake of prevention programs for CMD, we should use methods adapted to characteristics of non-responders, such as targeted invitation methods and improved risk communication.

Unwillingness to participate in health checks for cardiometabolic diseases: A survey among primary health care patients in five European countries.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Since cardiometabolic diseases (CMD) are a frequent cause of death worldwide, preventive strategies are needed. Recruiting adults for a health check could facilitate the identification of individuals at risk for CMD. For successful results, participation is crucial. We aimed to identify factors related to unwillingness to participate in CMD health checks. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study in the Czech Republic, Denmark, Greece, the Netherlands, and Sweden. A questionnaire was distributed among persons without known CMD consulting general practice between January and July 2017 within the framework of the SPIMEU study. RESULTS: In total, 1354 persons responded. Nine percent was unwilling to participate in a CMD health check. Male gender, smoking, higher self-rated health, never been invited before, and not willing to pay were related to unwillingness to participate. The most mentioned reason for unwillingness to participate was "I think that I am healthy" (57%). Among the respondents who were willing to participate, 94% preferred an invitation by the general practitioner and 66% was willing to pay. CONCLUSION: A minority of the respondents was unwilling to participate in a CMD health check with consistent results within the five countries. This provides a promising starting point to increase participation in CMD health checks in primary care.

Cost-effectiveness of a stepwise cardiometabolic disease prevention program: results of a randomized controlled trial in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Cardiometabolic diseases (CMD) are the major cause of death worldwide and are associated with a lower quality of life and high healthcare costs. To prevent a further rise in CMD and related healthcare costs, early detection and adequate management of individuals at risk could be an effective preventive strategy. The objective of this study was to determine long-term cost-effectiveness of stepwise CMD risk assessment followed by individualized treatment if indicated compared to care as usual. A computer-based simulation model was used to project long-term health benefits and cost-effectiveness, assuming the prevention program was implemented in Dutch primary care. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial in a primary care setting in which 1934 participants aged 45-70 years without recorded CMD or CMD risk factors participated. The intervention group was invited for stepwise CMD risk assessment through a risk score (step 1), additional risk assessment at the practice in case of increased risk (step 2) and individualized follow-up treatment if indicated (step 3). The control group was not invited for risk assessment, but completed a health questionnaire. Results of the effectiveness analysis on systolic blood pressure (- 2.26 mmHg; 95% CI - 4.01: - 0.51) and total cholesterol (- 0.15 mmol/l; 95% CI - 0.23: - 0.07) were used in this analysis. Outcome measures were the costs and benefits after 1-year follow-up and long-term (60 years) cost-effectiveness of stepwise CMD risk assessment compared to no assessment. A computer-based simulation model was used that included data on disability weights associated with age and disease outcomes related to CMD. Analyses were performed taking a healthcare perspective. RESULTS: After 1 year, the average costs in the intervention group were 260 Euro higher than in the control group and differences were mainly driven by healthcare costs. No meaningful change was found in EQ 5D-based quality of life between the intervention and control groups after 1-year follow-up (- 0.0154; 95% CI - 0.029: 0.004). After 60 years, cumulative costs of the intervention were 41.4 million Euro and 135 quality-adjusted life years (QALY) were gained. Despite improvements in blood pressure and cholesterol, the intervention was not cost-effective (ICER of 306,000 Euro/QALY after 60 years). Scenario analyses did not allow for a change in conclusions with regard to cost-effectiveness of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of this primary care-based CMD prevention program is not cost-effective in the long term. Implementation of this program in primary care cannot be recommended. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register NTR4277 , registered on 26 November 2013.