PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
October 11, 2016CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians155 citationsOpen Access

The primary care provider ( PCP )‐cancer specialist relationship: A systematic review and mixed‐methods meta‐synthesis

View Full Paper
LDLesly A. DossettUniversity of MichiganJHJanella HudsonOptum (United States)AMArden M. MorrisStanford Medicine

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Although they are critical to models of coordinated care, the relationship and communication between primary care providers (PCPs) and cancer specialists throughout the cancer continuum are poorly understood. By using predefined search terms, the authors conducted a systematic review of the literature in 3 databases to examine the relationship and communication between PCPs and cancer specialists. Among 301 articles identified, 35 met all inclusion criteria and were reviewed in-depth. Findings from qualitative, quantitative, and disaggregated mixed-methods studies were integrated using meta-synthesis. Six themes were identified and incorporated into a preliminary conceptual model of the PCP-cancer specialist relationship: 1) poor and delayed communication between PCPs and cancer specialists, 2) cancer specialists' endorsement of a specialist-based model of care, 3) PCPs' belief that they play an important role in the cancer continuum, 4) PCPs' willingness to participate in the cancer continuum, 5) cancer specialists' and PCPs' uncertainty regarding the PCP's oncology knowledge/experience, and 6) discrepancies between PCPs and cancer specialists regarding roles. These data indicate a pervasive need for improved communication, delineation, and coordination of responsibilities between PCPs and cancer specialists. Future interventions aimed at these deficiencies may improve patient and physician satisfaction and cancer care coordination. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:156-169. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Dossett et al. (2016) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d8a37718b0ca7f91d189a9https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21385
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement2009 · 83,657 citations
  2. 2Future Supply and Demand for Oncologists : Challenges to Assuring Access to Oncology Services2007 · 529 citations
  3. 3Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement2009 · 20,004 citations
  4. 4Quality of care for patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus—a long‐term comparison of two quality improvement programmes in the Netherlands2003 · 54 citations
  5. 5A Model for the Shared Care of Elderly Patients with Cancer2009 · 44 citations