Follow-up care for cancer

Making the benefits equal the cost

David Schwartz, Kevin Billingsley, Kent Wallner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Posttreatment follow-up is a staple of oncologic practice. Clinicians have traditionally presumed that close surveillance improves clinical outcome. However, new evidence reveals that frequent, procedure-intensive follow-up may provide no more significant benefit to patients than simpler approaches. Several recent consensus recommendations from major oncology organizations support this theory. Published surveys of clinician and institutional follow-up policies reveal significant variations in practice, with many providers continuing to use costly, unproven regimens. This review highlights current data on follow-up care for three common cancers - breast, colorectal, and prostate. These data suggest an acute need for changes leading to more rational, consistent, and efficient follow-up practices.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1493-1501
Number of pages9
JournalOncology
Volume14
Issue number10
StatePublished - 2000
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Aftercare
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Prostatic Neoplasms
Organizations
Breast Neoplasms
Neoplasms
Surveys and Questionnaires

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology

Cite this

Schwartz, D., Billingsley, K., & Wallner, K. (2000). Follow-up care for cancer: Making the benefits equal the cost. Oncology, 14(10), 1493-1501.

Follow-up care for cancer : Making the benefits equal the cost. / Schwartz, David; Billingsley, Kevin; Wallner, Kent.

In: Oncology, Vol. 14, No. 10, 2000, p. 1493-1501.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Schwartz, D, Billingsley, K & Wallner, K 2000, 'Follow-up care for cancer: Making the benefits equal the cost', Oncology, vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 1493-1501.
Schwartz, David ; Billingsley, Kevin ; Wallner, Kent. / Follow-up care for cancer : Making the benefits equal the cost. In: Oncology. 2000 ; Vol. 14, No. 10. pp. 1493-1501.
@article{6fab221d604f43d1b83f6655f9a1df87,
title = "Follow-up care for cancer: Making the benefits equal the cost",
abstract = "Posttreatment follow-up is a staple of oncologic practice. Clinicians have traditionally presumed that close surveillance improves clinical outcome. However, new evidence reveals that frequent, procedure-intensive follow-up may provide no more significant benefit to patients than simpler approaches. Several recent consensus recommendations from major oncology organizations support this theory. Published surveys of clinician and institutional follow-up policies reveal significant variations in practice, with many providers continuing to use costly, unproven regimens. This review highlights current data on follow-up care for three common cancers - breast, colorectal, and prostate. These data suggest an acute need for changes leading to more rational, consistent, and efficient follow-up practices.",
author = "David Schwartz and Kevin Billingsley and Kent Wallner",
year = "2000",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "1493--1501",
journal = "ONCOLOGY (United States)",
issn = "0890-9091",
publisher = "UBM Medica Healthcare Publications",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Follow-up care for cancer

T2 - Making the benefits equal the cost

AU - Schwartz, David

AU - Billingsley, Kevin

AU - Wallner, Kent

PY - 2000

Y1 - 2000

N2 - Posttreatment follow-up is a staple of oncologic practice. Clinicians have traditionally presumed that close surveillance improves clinical outcome. However, new evidence reveals that frequent, procedure-intensive follow-up may provide no more significant benefit to patients than simpler approaches. Several recent consensus recommendations from major oncology organizations support this theory. Published surveys of clinician and institutional follow-up policies reveal significant variations in practice, with many providers continuing to use costly, unproven regimens. This review highlights current data on follow-up care for three common cancers - breast, colorectal, and prostate. These data suggest an acute need for changes leading to more rational, consistent, and efficient follow-up practices.

AB - Posttreatment follow-up is a staple of oncologic practice. Clinicians have traditionally presumed that close surveillance improves clinical outcome. However, new evidence reveals that frequent, procedure-intensive follow-up may provide no more significant benefit to patients than simpler approaches. Several recent consensus recommendations from major oncology organizations support this theory. Published surveys of clinician and institutional follow-up policies reveal significant variations in practice, with many providers continuing to use costly, unproven regimens. This review highlights current data on follow-up care for three common cancers - breast, colorectal, and prostate. These data suggest an acute need for changes leading to more rational, consistent, and efficient follow-up practices.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034304554&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034304554&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 1493

EP - 1501

JO - ONCOLOGY (United States)

JF - ONCOLOGY (United States)

SN - 0890-9091

IS - 10

ER -