uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Nurse or surgeon-led follow-up after rectal cancer: a randomised trial
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Medicinska och farmaceutiska vetenskapsområdet, centrumbildningar mm, Centre for Clinical Research, County of Västmanland.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Medicinska och farmaceutiska vetenskapsområdet, centrumbildningar mm, Centre for Clinical Research, County of Västmanland.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Medicinska och farmaceutiska vetenskapsområdet, centrumbildningar mm, Centre for Clinical Research, County of Västmanland.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Medicinska och farmaceutiska vetenskapsområdet, centrumbildningar mm, Centre for Clinical Research, County of Västmanland.
2011 (English)In: Colorectal Disease, ISSN 1462-8910, E-ISSN 1463-1318, Vol. 13, no 9, 999-1003 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Follow up programmes consume a large amount of resources with less time for the surgeon to take on new patients. The aim of this randomised study was to compare patient satisfaction, resource utilisation, and medical safety in patients curatively operated for rectal cancer who were followed up by a surgeon or a nurse. Method: The nurse was trained by the colorectal surgeon before the start of the study. Curatively operated patients were asked to give their assent to participation. Randomisation was done by the stomatherapist. After each consultation the patient completed a questionnaire. Results: 110 patients (58 men), age 68 (range 41-87) years, were included between 2002-2005. Only three patients refused participation. Patient satisfaction was high according to VAS: 9.4 for the surgeon and 9.5 for the nurse (n.s.). Consultation time was longer for the nurse: 24 versus 15 minutes (p = 0.001), with more blood samples being taken (29% versus 7%, p = 0.002). Radiological investigations exceeding the routine were made in 11% versus 4% (n.s) of cases. Surgical assistance was needed in 13 out of 182 consultations with the nurse (mean 6 (1-15) min, totally 75 min).. Distant metastases were detected in seven patients in the surgeon and eight in the nurse group, (p = 0.953). Total costs for the follow-up did not differ. Conclusion: Patient satisfaction was equally high for the specialist nurse as for the colorectal surgeon. On only a few occasions was surgical assistance necessary, and total costs for the follow-up showed no difference. Medical security appeared uncompromised. Nurse-led follow-up is encouraged.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2011. Vol. 13, no 9, 999-1003 p.
Keyword [en]
rectal cancer, follow-up, specialist nurse
National Category
Surgery Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-153372DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2010.02317.xISI: 000293999800022PubMedID: 20478003OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-153372DiVA: diva2:416590
Available from: 2011-05-12 Created: 2011-05-12 Last updated: 2017-12-11Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed
By organisation
Centre for Clinical Research, County of Västmanland
In the same journal
Colorectal Disease
SurgeryGastroenterology and Hepatology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 404 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf