Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2017 Sep 18;12(9):e0184740.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0184740. eCollection 2017.

Psychological effects of the intensified follow-up of the CEAwatch trial after treatment for colorectal cancer

Zhuozhao Zhan  1 , Charlotte J Verberne  2 , Edwin R van den Heuvel  1   3 , Irene Grossmann  2   4 , Adelita V Ranchor  5 , Theo Wiggers  2 , Geertruida H de Bock  1
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Psychological effects of the intensified follow-up of the CEAwatch trial after treatment for colorectal cancer

Zhuozhao Zhan et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to evaluate psychological effects of the state-of-art intensified follow-up protocol for colorectal cancer patients in the CEAwatch trial.

Method: At two time points during the CEAwatch trial questionnaires regarding patients' attitude towards follow-up, patients' psychological functioning and patients' experiences and expectations were sent to participants by post. Linear mixed models were fitted to assess the influences and secular trends of the intensified follow-up on patients' attitude towards follow-up and psychological functioning. As secondary outcome, odds ratios were calculated using ordinal logistic mixed model to compare patients' experiences to their expectations, as well as their experiences at two different time points.

Results: No statistical significant effects of the intensified follow-up were found on patients' attitude towards the follow-up and psychological functioning variables. Patients had high expectations of the intensified follow-up and their experiences at the second time point were more positive compared to the scores at the first time point.

Conclusion: The intensified follow-up protocol posed no adverse effects on patients' attitude towards follow-up and psychological functioning. In general, patients were more nervous and anxious at the start of the new follow-up protocol, had high expectations of the new follow-up protocol and were troubled by the nuisances of the blood sample testing. As they spent more time in the follow-up and became more adapted to it, the nervousness and anxiety decreased and the preference for the frequent blood test became high in replacement of conversations with the doctors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Consort diagram of the CEAwatch trial.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Patients experiences of the intensified follow-up compared to their expectations.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Patients’ 2nd time experiences of the intensified follow-up compared to their 1st time experiences.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Tjandra JJ, Chan MKY. Follow-up after curative resection of colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Dis Colon Rectum [Internet]. 2007. November [cited 2013 Aug 28];50(11):1783–99. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17874269 doi: 10.1007/s10350-007-9030-5 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Figueredo A, Rumble RB, Maroun J, Earle CC, Cummings B, McLeod R, et al. Follow-up of patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer: a practice guideline. BMC Cancer [Internet]. 2003. October 6;3:26 Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=270033&tool=pm... doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-3-26 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pita-Fernandez S, Alhayek-Ai M, Gonzalez-Martin C, Lopez-Calvino B, Seoane-Pillado T, Pertega-Diaz S. Intensive follow-up strategies improve outcomes in nonmetastatic colorectal cancer patients after curative surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Oncol [Internet]. 2014;941–50. Available from: http://annonc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/doi/10.1093/annonc/mdu543 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Primrose JN, Perera R, Gray A, Rose P, Fuller A, Corkhill A, et al. Effect of 3 to 5 years of scheduled CEA and CT follow-up to detect recurrence of colorectal cancer: the FACS randomized clinical trial. JAMA [Internet]. 2014;311(3):263–70. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24430319 doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.285718 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jeffery M, Hickey B, Hider P. Follow up strategies for patients treated for non-metastatic colorectal cancer (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev [Internet]. 2007. [cited 2013 Oct 21];(4). Available from: http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:137177 - PubMed

Publication types