Psychologie en Gezondheid

, Volume 37, Issue 3, pp 145–151 | Cite as

Wensen en behoeften van patiënten ten aanzien van routine follow-up na behandeling voor colorectaal carcinoom

  • H. A. Balk
  • J. D. van Bergeijk
  • I. M. Rabeling-Keus


Needs and preferences regarding routine follow-up of patients treated for colorectal cancer

The aim of this study is to investigate needs and preferences regarding routine follow-up of patients treated for colorectal cancer (CRC) with curative intent and to explore the effect of length of follow-up after treatment on these needs and preferences. 127 disease-free patients treated for CRC were sent a standardized questionnaire. 118 completed questionnaires could be analyzed. Participants had high expectations about follow-up care concerning detection of recurrences and metastases and with that the life expectancy. Most of them judged the communication to be positive, were reassured by the follow-up and did not anticipate the visits with nervous distress. The investigations were not seen as burdensome, but a majority of the patients disliked being reminded of the disease. Nearly half of all respondents prefer lifelong follow-up and nearly all patients would be distressed when follow-up would stop after several years. Most patients were satisfied with the investigation intervals. They wanted information or preferred talking about several subjects like heredity, prognosis and stools. A quarter of all participants would appreciate psychological support. Length of follow-up was only related to fear of recurrence, preference of the frequency of follow-up visits, additional investigations and preference of follow-up provider.

Patients treated for CRC reported a strong preference for long-term follow-up, which could provide reassurance, information and psychological support. There are high expectations about follow-up care, while earlier research show that follow-up does not influence overall survival. The advantages of invasive investigations outweigh the disadvantages.


  1. Adewuyi-Dalton, R., Ziebland, S., Grunfeld, E., & Hall, A. (1998). Patients’ views of routine hospital follow-up: a qualitative study of women with breast cancer in remission. Psychooncology, 7, 436-439.Google Scholar
  2. Bock, G.H. de, Bonnema, J., Zwaan, R.E., Velde, C.J.H. van de, Kievit, J., & Stiggelbout, A.M. (2004). Patients’ needs and preferences in routine follow-up after treatment for breast cancer. British Journal of Cancer, 90, 1144-1150.Google Scholar
  3. Bruinvels, D.J. (1995). Follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Leidse Universiteit: Leiden.Google Scholar
  4. Bruinvels, D.J., Stiggelbout, A.M., Kievit, J., Houwelingen, J.C. van, Habbema, J.D.F., & Velde, C.J.H. van de (1994). Follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Annals of Surgery, 219, 174-182.Google Scholar
  5. Dukes, C.E. (1932). The classification of the rectum. The Journal of Pathology, 35, 323-332.Google Scholar
  6. Earnshaw, J.J., & Stephenson, Y. (1997). First two years of a follow-up breast clinic led by a nurse practitioner. Journal of Royal Society of Medicine, 90, 258-259.Google Scholar
  7. Gezondheidsraad (2007). Nacontrole in de oncologie. Doelen onderscheiden, inhoud onderbouwen [elektronische versie]. Den Haag: Gezondheidsraad. Publicatienr. 2007/10. Gevonden op 8 juni 2007, op
  8. Grunfeld, E., Fitzpatrick, R., Mant, D., Yudkin, P., Adewuyi-Dalton, R., Stewart, J., Cole, D., & Vessey, M. (1999). Comparison of breast cancer patient satisfaction with follow-up in primary care versus specialist care: results from a randomized controlled trial. British Journal of General Practice, 49, 705-710.Google Scholar
  9. Kiebert, G.M., Welvaart, K., & Kievit, J. (1993). Psychological effects of routine follow-up on cancer patients after surgery. European Journal of Surgery, 159, 601-607.Google Scholar
  10. Kievit, J. (2000). Colorectal cancer follow-up: a reassessment of empirical evidence on effectiveness. European Journal of Surgical Oncology, 26, 322-328.Google Scholar
  11. Lin, O.S., Schembre, D.B., Ayub, K., Gluck, M., McCormick, S.E., Patterson, D.J., Cantone, N., Soon, M., & Kozarek, R.A. (2007). Patient satisfaction scores for endoscopic procedures: impact of a survey-collection method. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, 65, 775-781.Google Scholar
  12. Mills, M.E., & Sullivan, K. (1999). The importance of information giving for patients newly diagnosed with cancer: a review of the literature. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 8, 631-642.Google Scholar
  13. Nicholson, F.B., & Korman, M.G. (2005). Acceptance of flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy for screening and surveillance in colorectal cancer prevention. Journal of Medical Screening, 12, 89-95.Google Scholar
  14. Papagrigoriadis, S., & Heyman, B. (2003). Patients’ views on follow-up of colorectal cancer: implications for risk communication and decision making. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 79, 403-407.Google Scholar
  15. Renehan, A.G., Egger, M., Saunders, M.P., & O’Dwyer, S.T. (2002). Impact on survival of intensive follow-up after curative resection for colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. British Medical Journal, 324, 813-820.Google Scholar
  16. Rozmovits, L., Rose, P., & Ziebland, S. (2004). In the absence of evidence, who chooses? A qualitative study of patients’ needs after treatment for colorectal cancer. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 9, 159-164.Google Scholar
  17. Stiggelbout, A.M., Haes,, Vree, R., Velde, C.J.H. van de, Bruijninckx, C.M.A., Groningen, K. van, & Kievit, J. (1997). Follow-up of colorectal cancer patients: quality of life and attitudes towards follow-up. British Journal of Cancer, 75, 914-920.Google Scholar
  18. Wiggers, T. (2001). Follow-up na oncologische chirurgie. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde, 145, 2261-2264.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. A. Balk
    • 1
  • J. D. van Bergeijk
  • I. M. Rabeling-Keus
  1. 1.

Personalised recommendations