Follow-up after rectal cancer: developing and testing a novel patient-led follow-up program. Study protocol

References

• Haggar FA, Boushey RP. Colorectal cancer epidemiology: incidence, mortality, survival, and risk factors. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2009;22:191–197.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• DCCG. The Danish Colorectal Cancer Group Database. National Annual Report 2014; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Bondeven P, Laurberg S, Hagemann-Madsen RH, et al. Suboptimal surgery and omission of neoadjuvant therapy for upper rectal cancer is associated with a high risk of local recurrence. Colorectal Dis. 2015;17:216–224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulow S, Harling H, Iversen LH, Ladelund S. Danish Colorectal Cancer Group. Improved survival after rectal cancer in Denmark. Colorectal Dis. 2010;12:e37–e42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Danish Health Authority. Follow-up programme for colorectal cancer patients; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Heriot AG, Byrne CM, Lee P, et al. Extended radical resection: the choice for locally recurrent rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008;51:284–291.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmer G, Martling A, Cedermark B, et al. A population-based study on the management and outcome in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 14:447–454.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeffery M, Hickey BE, Hider PN. Follow-up strategies for patients treated for non-metastatic colorectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;1:CD002200.
   Google Scholar
• The Danish Health Authority. National Integrated Cancer Pathway for Colorectal Cancer; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Emmertsen KJ, Laurberg S. Bowel dysfunction after treatment for rectal cancer. Acta Oncol. 2008;47:994–1003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen TY, Emmertsen KJ, Laurberg S. Bowel dysfunction after rectal cancer treatment: a study comparing the specialist's versus patient's perspective. BMJ Open. 2014;4:e003374.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bregendahl S, Emmertsen KJ, Lindegaard JC, et al. Urinary and sexual dysfunction in women after resection with and without preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer: a population-based cross-sectional study. Colorectal Dis. 2015;17:26–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lange MM, van de Velde CJ. Urinary and sexual dysfunction after rectal cancer treatment. Nat Rev Urol. 2011;8:51–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johansen C. Kræft - Senfølger og Rehabilitering. 1st ed. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Thewes B, Butow P, Zachariae R, et al. Fear of cancer recurrence: a systematic literature review of self-report measures. Psychooncology. 2012;21:571–587.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engel J, Kerr J, Schlesinger-Raab A, et al. Quality of life in rectal cancer patients: a four-year prospective study. Ann Surg. 2003;238:203–213.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marventano S, Forjaz M, Grosso G, et al. Health related quality of life in colorectal cancer patients: state of the art. BMC Surg. 2013;13(Suppl 2):S15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Danish Cancer Society. Cancer-follow-up in the perspective of the cancer patient; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Kjærside B, Lomborg K, Munch-Hansen T, Riiskjær E. Measuring indicators for patient involvement: theoretical and methodological considerations; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap): a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42:377–381.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward WL, Hahn EA, Mo F, et al. Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT-C) quality of life instrument. Qual Life Res. 1999;8:181–195.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310:2191–2194.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Danish Health Authorities. Patient education: a Health Technology Assessment. 2009;11(3).
   Google Scholar
• Hinrichsen EK. Handbook of learning- and coping-educations. Experience-based and professional knowledge side by side. Defactum, Corporate Quality, Central Denmark Region; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Kvale S. An introduction to the qualitative research interview. 1st ed. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• The Danish Cancer Society. Quality and patient safety. Cancer patients' needs and experiences throughout treatment and follow-up. A survey from The Danish Cancer Society; 2013.
   Google Scholar