Ietje Perfors

135 on 3 out of 6 subscales, -14.2 (95% CI -27.0;-1.3) for GP quality, -15,9 (-29.1;- 2.6) for GP availability and -15.2 (95%CI -29.1;-1.4) for information provision. Patients in the intervention group visited the GP practice and the emergency department more often compared to the control group (RR 1.3 (1.0;1.7) and RR 1.70 (1.0;2.8), respectively). Quality of life, mental health, and patient self- efficacy did not differ between groups. Conclusion In conclusion, the GRIP intervention, which aimed to involve the primary care team during and after cancer treatment, slightly increased the number of primary healthcare contacts. However, it did not improve patient satisfaction with care and it increased emergency department visits. As the high uptake of the intervention suggests that it addresses patients’ needs, future research should focus on optimizing the design and implementation of the intervention. 6