Search

The United States and the European Union (EU) vary widely in approaches to ensuring affordable health care coverage for our respective populations. Such variations stem from differences in the political systems and beliefs regarding social welfare. These variations are also reflected in past and future initiatives to provide high quality cancer survivorship care. The United States spends considerably more on health care compared to most European countries, often with no proven benefit. In the United States, individuals with chronic illnesses, such as cancer survivors, often experience difficulties affording insurance and maintaining coverage, a problem unknown to EU countries with national health insurance. This article reviews health policy development over time for the United States and EU and the impact for cancer survivors. For the United States, the impact of the Affordable Care Act on improving access to affordable care for cancer survivors is highlighted. For the EU, the importance of multiple-morbidity disease management, cancer plan development, and pan-European data collection for monitoring cancer outcomes is addressed. Given predicted workforce shortages and ever-increasing numbers of aging cancer survivors on both sides of the Atlantic, sharing lessons learned will be critical., (Copyright © 2013 American Cancer Society.)

Background and Purpose: The European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology was funded by the EU for a project on recording providing education, and ameliorating the consequences of treatment (REACT). An European audit was carried out as part of which to assess the usefulness of current follow-up practices., Patients and Methods: Over a 4-month period in 15 cancer centres in 10 countries, patients attending for routine follow-up completed a questionnaire covering their expectations of and satisfaction with the visit. This was matched with a questionnaire completed by the physician about the content and usefulness of the consultation. The feasibility of a short toxicity scale developed by Dische and Saunders was also investigated., Results: In total, 2303 matched questionnaires were analysed. Forty percent of the patients had symptoms or medical problems related to their disease. In 18% there was a positive finding on clinical examination. In 28% investigations were undertaken part of departmental routine practice. Ten percent of the investigations showed an abnormal result. Ninety nine percent of physicians and 85% of the patients expressed satisfaction. Using the short toxicity scale rates of recording toxicity could be increased from 28 to 93%., Conclusions: There is wide variation in follow-up practices among European centres. There was a low incidence of positive findings clinically or with routine investigations. A simple scale for recording morbidity has proved easy to use by departments, which have not routinely used one of the standard measures. Further work will attempt to produce an European guideline for effective routine follow-up after radiotherapy.

Problems with poor compliance when collecting quality of life data (QoL) in randomised clinical trials have prompted investigators to suggest measures to improve data collection. This study sought to look at the practical problems encountered by data managers and nurses in the cross-cultural setting of EORTC trials. A literature search was followed by a poster workshop session at a meeting of the EORTC study Group on Data Management and finally a postal questionnaire. The key problems identified centred around the lack of interest from some clinicians, lack of resources, inadequate protocols and a desire for training in the rationale for collecting QoL data to aid discussions with patients. Despite these problems many data managers and nurses found it rewarding to be on the 'frontline'. Since this study, the EORTC Data Center and in particular the Quality of Life Study Group and the Quality of Life Unit have implemented a number of measures to improve compliance. These include written guidelines for EORTC trials and a training course planned for Autumn 1999.