Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

GP-led melanoma follow-up: views and feelings of patient recipients

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of this study was to explore the practical experiences and feelings of people with cutaneous malignant melanoma about receiving structured melanoma follow-up from their general practitioner (GP) as an alternative to traditional hospital-based follow-up.

Design

Semi-structured audio-taped telephone interviews were conducted with patient recipients of a GP-led follow-up programme for people with cutaneous malignant melanoma.

Subjects

Eighteen people with cutaneous malignant melanoma that had received structured GP-led routine follow-up for cutaneous malignant melanoma took part in this study.

Results

GP-led melanoma follow-up worked well from the perspectives patients. Patients appreciated convenience of the system, less rushed appointments with more thorough examinations, a more pleasant atmosphere and greater continuity of care. They regarded the GP-led follow-up positively, irrespective of distance from the major cancer centre. Concerns expressed included awareness that most GPs had less experience of melanoma than hospital specialists.

Conclusions

GP-led melanoma follow-up is feasible and is generally viewed positively by those patients that have experienced it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Maher J, Bradburn J, Adewuyi-Dalton R (1995) Patients prefer specialist follow-up. BMJ 311:54

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 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. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1611(1998090)7:5<436::AID-PON319>3.0.CO;2-C

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Koinberg I, Holmberg L, Fridlund B (2001) Satisfaction with routine follow-up visits to the physician: the needs of patients with breast cancer. Acta Oncol (Madr) 40:454–459. doi:10.1080/028418601750288163

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Koinberg I, Holmberg L, Fridlund B (2002) Breast cancer patients’ satisfaction with a spontaneous system of check-up visits to a specialist nurse. Scand J Caring Sci 16:209–215. doi:10.1046/j.1471-6712.2002.00040.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kelly L, Caldwell K, Henshaw L (2006) Involving users in service planning: a focus group approach. Eur J Oncol Nurs 10:283–293. doi:10.1016/j.ejon.2005.12.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bradley EJ, Pitts MK, Redman CWE, Calvert E (1999) The experience of long-term hospital follow-up for women who have suffered early stage gynaecological cancer: a qualitative interview study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 9:491–496. doi:10.1046/j.1525-1438.1999.99072.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Allen A (2002) The meaning of the breast cancer follow-up experience for the women who attend. Eur J Oncol Nurs 6:155–161. doi:10.1054/ejon.2002.0175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mason J (2002) Qualitative researching. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lanier D (2005) Lost in translation: the value of qualitative data. J Am Board Fam Pract 18:409–410. doi:10.3122/jabfm.18.5.409

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Murchie P, Hannaford PC, Wyke S, Nicolson MC, Campbell NC (2007) Designing an integrated follow-up programme for people treated for cutaneous malignant melanoma: a practical application of the MRC framework for the design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. Fam Pract 24:283–292. doi:10.1093/fampra/cmm006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kuzel AJ (1992) Sampling in qualitative inquiry. In: Crabtree BF, Miller WL (eds) Doing qualitative research. Sage, London, p 33

    Google Scholar 

  12. Taylor SJ, Bogdan R (1984) Introduction to qualitative research methods: the search for meanings. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  13. Meadows LM, Morse JM, Kuzel AJ (2002) The nature of qualitative evidence. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  14. Murchie P, Campbell NC, Ritchie LD, Thain J (2005) Running nurse-led secondary prevention clinics for coronary heart disease in primary care: qualitative study of health professionals’ perspectives. Br J Gen Pract 55:522–528

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cox K, Wilson E, Heath L, Collier J, Jones L, Johnston I (2006) Preferences for follow-up after treatment for lung cancer: assessing the nurse-led option. Cancer Nurs 29:176–187. doi:10.1097/00002820-200605000-00003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dancey A, Rayatt S, Courthold J, Roberts J (2005) Views of UK melanoma patients on routine follow-up care. Br J Plast Surg 58:245–250. doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2004.10.012

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre of Academic Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill Health Centre, Westburn Road, Aberdeen, AB25 2AY, UK

    Peter Murchie, Elizabeth K. Delaney, Neil C. Campbell & Philip C. Hannaford

Authors
  1. Peter Murchie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elizabeth K. Delaney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Neil C. Campbell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Philip C. Hannaford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Murchie.

Additional information

The corresponding author Peter Murchie has the right to grant full copyright on behalf of all authors and does grant full copyright on behalf of all authors.

All authors declare that the answers to the questions on your competing interest form are all no and therefore have nothing to declare.

Peter Murchie, Philip Hannaford and Neil Campbell designed the study. Peter Murchie ran the study day to day and conducted the interviews. Peter Murchie and Elizabeth Delaney analysed the data. Peter Murchie and Elizabeth Delaney wrote the paper with comments on drafts from Philip Hannaford and Neil Campbell. Peter Murchie is the guarantor of results.

Full ethical approval for the study was granted by the Joint NHS Grampian and University of Aberdeen Research Ethics Committee (REC reference number: 04/50801/75) on 11 November 2004.

The study was entirely funded by Cancer Research UK.

The University of Aberdeen acted as sponsor for the study.

This randomised trial, of which this was a parallel investigation, was registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Register (ISRCTN 71577271).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Murchie, P., Delaney, E.K., Campbell, N.C. et al. GP-led melanoma follow-up: views and feelings of patient recipients. Support Care Cancer 18, 225–233 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-009-0648-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-009-0648-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation