The role of the general practitioner in cancer care: a survey of the patients' perspective.

PURPOSE: Modern cancer care is provided in highly specialized structures as certificated centres and comprehensive cancer center, as well as specialized practices. In contrast, the position of the general practitioner (GP) is less well characterised and there is a lack of information about his importance in the care for cancer patients. The aim of our survey was to assess the role of GPs in German cancer care from patients' perspective. METHODS: In several steps we developed a standardized anonymous questionnaire in cooperation with the German Association of General Practitioners and the Federal Association of German Self-Help Groups. This questionnaire was used in a print and an online version and distributed by the self-help organizations to their members. RESULTS: Seven hundred and forty participants took part in the survey, 66.5% women and 30.1% men. 71% had visited the GP during cancer therapy and 34.5% discussed decisions concerning diagnostics and therapy with him. The most relevant reasons to visit the GP during cancer therapy were to get a blood test (63.3%), comorbidities (42.7%) and complaints and side effects (38.3%). For the latter, most often a detailed discussion ensued (57%), fooled by a prescription (37.7%). In 63.4% the GP offered support when patients had some questions or worries concerning their cancer. Yet, 17% of the patients reported that the GP did not try to help. 85.5% of the participants thought that it is important that their GP is informed about the therapy on a regular basis. For 77.0%, a simultaneous care provided by the GP is important or very important. CONCLUSION: Our survey points to the importance of the GP during cancer therapy from the patient's point of view. Patients want their GP to take an active part in the cancer therapy. Furthermore, early integration of the GP may also enhance early integration of palliative care and also help family members and caregivers. A strategy to integrate GPs is the establishment of shared care models, in which GPs are supported by specialists and get additional training in cancer care.

Information needs of oncologists, general practitioners and other professionals caring for patients with cancer.

Oncology is a rapidly developing field with a growing number of publications every year. The main goal of this survey was to learn more about the information needs of oncologists and general practitioners. Data were collected using a standardised questionnaire developed in collaboration with the German Cancer Society (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft) and the German Association of General Practitioners (Deutscher Hausärzteverband). A total of 495 questionnaires could be evaluated. Medical congresses were the preferred source of information for all participants. General practitioners preferred textbooks, while oncologists preferred journals and the Internet (all p < .001). Reasons for a lack of confidence during patient consultation were lack of time (60% of participants), lack of knowledge (61% of general practitioners and 26% of oncologists) and lack of data (>50%). Oncologists felt more confident in searching scientific databases than general practitioners did. Both groups required rapid access to transparent information. For general practitioners, reviews and comments by experts helped to put new information in the context of cancer treatment. Oncologists and general practitioners showed significantly different information needs and different ways to access specific information. In order to better integrate general practitioners while simultaneously serving the needs of oncologists, a database that is up to date, rapidly accessible and does not incur high costs would be helpful.

Information Needs of Cancer Patients and Perception of Impact of the Disease, of Self-Efficacy, and Locus of Control.

The aim of our study was to investigate the relationship between information needs and cancer patients' perceptions of the impact of the disease, self-efficacy, and locus of control. Using a standardized questionnaire, we obtained data from patients who attended a series of lectures. The questionnaire included questions on their information needs, sources of information, satisfaction with information, and short questionnaires on self-efficacy, perception of the disease, and locus of control of reinforcement. Data was obtained from 185 patients. Our results showed that the sources of information that were most often used were physicians (84 %), print media (68 %), and the Internet (59 %); online fora (7.5 %), non-medical practitioners (9.7 %), and telephone-based counseling (8.6 %) were only used by a minority. Patients with a high perception of their own control over the disease more often used any source of information available to them and were more often interested in acquiring additional information. Higher self-efficacy was significantly associated with the need for information on all topics. Patients with a higher external locus of control significantly more often used sources of information and had significantly more need for additional information. By contrast, there were no associations with an internal locus of control. Neither external nor internal locus of control showed any associations with satisfaction with information. Information needs seem to be higher in patients with a high external locus of control and low self-efficacy. Physicians, other professionals, and institutions that provide information may take these relationships into consideration for tailoring their services to patients.