Ietje Perfors

110 Chapter 5 choice, explanation of the treatment options, consideration of the treatment options provided and making an informed choice. 8 Research suggests that SDM improves knowledge and understanding of treatment options, 9–11 creates more realistic expectations 9 and better matches patient’s preferences and subsequent treatment decisions. 9 Moreover, patients feel better informed, 12 are more determined on their personal values 12 and experience better communication with their practitioner. 9–11 Adequate SDMmight also improve medication adherence, 11 mental health-related quality of life 13 and reduce healthcare costs 14 . Several large studies have demonstrated that patients want to be involved in decision making. 15–17 Additionally, a recent survey in the Netherlands among 4 700 patients treated for cancer showed that the majority of patients prefer their GP to be involved, as the GP can help to create awareness of choice and can prepare the patient for the treatment decision in hospital. 18 So far, the effectiveness of GP involvement in SDM for cancer treatment decisions has not been evaluated. In the randomized controlled GRIP trial, we evaluate the effects of providing structural follow-up care from primary care during cancer treatment. This follow-up care starts with a Time Out Consultation (TOC) between patient and GP immediately after cancer diagnosis. Here we report the effects of a TOC after a cancer diagnosis for patients treated with curative intent, on patient-perceived SDM, information provision and perceived self-efficacy.