Cited by 138Cancer survivorship and careMedical Practices and RehabilitationChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life

Effectiveness of Multidimensional Cancer Survivor Rehabilitation and Cost-Effectiveness of Cancer Rehabilitation in General: A Systematic Review

Open access
Mewes, Janne C., Steuten, Lotte M.G., IJzerman, Maarten J., van Harten, Wim H.·2012·The Oncologist

Abstract

Introduction.: Many cancer survivors suffer from a combination of disease- and treatment-related morbidities and complaints after primary treatment. There is a growing evidence base for the effectiveness of monodimensional rehabilitation interventions; in practice, however, patients often participate in multidimensional programs. This study systematically reviews evidence regarding effectiveness of multidimensional rehabilitation programs for cancer survivors and cost-effectiveness of cancer rehabilitation in general. Methods.: The published literature was systematically reviewed. Data were extracted using standardized forms and were summarized narratively. Results.: Sixteen effectiveness and six cost-effectiveness studies were included. Multidimensional rehabilitation programs were found to be effective, but not more effective than monodimensional interventions, and not on all outcome measures. Effect sizes for quality of life were in the range of −0.12 (95% confidence interval [CI], −0.45–0.20) to 0.98 (95% CI, 0.69–1.29). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from −€16,976, indicating cost savings, to €11,057 per quality-adjusted life year. Conclusions.: The evidence for multidimensional interventions and the economic impact of rehabilitation studies is scarce and dominated by breast cancer studies. Studies published so far report statistically significant benefits for multidimensional interventions over usual care, most notably for the outcomes fatigue and physical functioning. An additional benefit of multidimensional over monodimensional rehabilitation was not found, but this was also sparsely reported on. Available economic evaluations assessed very different rehabilitation interventions. Yet, despite low comparability, all showed favorable cost-effectiveness ratios. Future studies should focus their designs on the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multidimensional programs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1634/theoncologist.2012-0151

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mewes, J. C., Steuten, L. M. G., IJzerman, M. J., & van Harten, W. H.
Affiliations
  • University of Twente (NL)
  • a University of Twente, Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Enschede, The Netherlands;
Corresponding author
Steuten, Lotte M.G.
Venue
The Oncologist
Published
2012-09-26
Volume
17
Issue
12
Pages
1581-1593
ISSN
  • 1083-7159 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-490X
OpenAlex
W2136781476
Cited by
138
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3
FWCI
0.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Oncologist (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Twente Research Information (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion)
Funders
KWF Kankerbestrijding
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Keywords
cancer survivorship, cancer rehabilitation, cost-effectiveness, quality of life, fatigue, physical function, breast cancer, comparative effectiveness
MeSH terms
Cost-Benefit Analysis, Humans, Neoplasms, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Survivors, Quality-Adjusted Life Years

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review