Journal of Health Care Communications Open Access

  • ISSN: 2472-1654
  • Journal h-index: 15
  • Journal CiteScore: 6.77
  • Journal Impact Factor: 7.34
  • Average acceptance to publication time (5-7 days)
  • Average article processing time (30-45 days) Less than 5 volumes 30 days
    8 - 9 volumes 40 days
    10 and more volumes 45 days
Reach us +32 25889658

Commentary - (2022) Volume 7, Issue 4

Personalized Post-Treatment Care for Cancer Patients by the Health care
Wendy Miller*
Department of Health Care, Maynooth University, Ireland
*Correspondence: Wendy Miller, Department of Health Care, Maynooth University, Ireland, Tel: + 3538947547832, Email:

Received: 30-Mar-2022, Manuscript No. IPJHCC-22-13385; Editor assigned: 01-Apr-2022, Pre QC No. IPJHCC-22-13385(PQ); Reviewed: 15-Apr-2022, QC No. IPJHCC-22-13385; Revised: 20-Apr-2022, Manuscript No. IPJHCC-22-13385(R); Published: 27-Apr-2022, DOI: 10.35248/2472-1654-7.4.7017


After therapy, malignant growth survivors require continuous, extensive consideration to work on personal satisfaction, lessen handicap, limit intricacies, and reestablish work. In Canada and universally, follow-up care keeps on being conveyed most frequently by oncologists in organization based settings. There is broad proof to exhibit that this model of care doesn’t function admirably for some survivors or our disease frameworks. Randomized controlled preliminaries have plainly exhibited that substitute ways to deal with follow-up care are comparable to oncologist-drove follow-up regarding patient results, like repeat, endurance, and personal satisfaction in various normal tumors.

In this paper, we discuss the state of follow-up care for people who have overcome common malignant growths and the need for more customised follow-up models. Without a doubt, there is no one-size-fits-all solution for post-therapy follow-up care, and more customised approaches based on individual risks and needs after disease treatment are justified. In terms of customising follow-up care for malignant growth survivors, Canada lags behind. There are several reasons for this, including difficulty determining who is best served by various subsequent pathways, a lack of evidence-based self-administration training and supports for the majority of survivors, ineffectively created IT arrangements and frameworks, and lopsided care coordination.

Until now, a critical gap in the current investigation has been the inability to comprehend the acceptability and viability of elective care models across various population groups. Understanding whether and how customised approaches to follow- up can address differences in care and supports will be critical to ensuring that all survivors receive the attention they require to improve personal satisfaction, reduce inability, limit difficulties, and resume work. According to current projections, one out of every two Canadians will develop disease during their lifetime, and the number of malignant growth cases in 2028-2032 will be 79 percent higher than in 2003-2007. The likelihood of a person contracting disease has increased as the number of Canadians diagnosed with malignant growth has increased. Truth be told, the percentage of malignant growth survivors has increased significantly in recent years 63 percent of those surveyed in Canada today will live for a long time or more after their diagnosis.

Finally, any new initiatives should be evaluated to ensure that they benefit patients and our health-care systems. Certifiable proof of changes in follow-up care models, such as the work in Ontario related to progress to essential consideration (shown above) , would provide leaders with valuable information on key aspects of medical service quality, such as security, adequacy, value, and effectiveness. Where possible, assessments should include a cost analysis of new models, as well as a compilation of results that are particularly important to survivors post-treatment.

For the vast majority of disease survivors or malignant growth frameworks, current post-therapy follow-up care models are ineffective. As a result, we must improve in Canada to address cancer survivors’ issues and support their recovery, as well as the challenges faced by our disease frameworks. Post-treatment follow-up care should be a part of the conversation as our examination and clinical networks embrace more customised approaches to malignant growth care. Risk-based follow-up care, in which one’s model of follow-up is customised based on individual risks, needs, and conditions, has been discussed for over a decade, but its implementation into training in Canada has been slow to non-existent. The implementation of defined pathways into routine consideration presents real challenges.



Conflict of Interest

The author declares there is no conflict of interest in publishing this article has been read and approved by all named authors.

Citation: Wendy M (2022). Personalized Post-Treatment Care for Cancer Patients by the Health care. J Healthc Commun. 7:7017.

Copyright: © Wendy M. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.