Opportunities for Improvement
Recommendation
The Netherlands needs an updated National Cancer Control Plan.
Rationale
Indicator 1: The Netherlands’ National Cancer Control Programme (NPK), a multi- stakeholder partnership, published the
“NPK Vision and Summary 2005-2010” in 2005. A progress report was published in 2010. The plan needs to be updated. An
updated national cancer control plan should ideally include the following elements: discussion of prevention, screening and
early detection, red flags and symptoms to look for in primary care, diagnosis, an implementation plan and a funding source.
Workshop participants agreed that an updated plan should look to improve the processes used to assess innovations in care.
Participants also noted that a focus on lung cancer is missing in the guidelines used in general practice, plus that there needs to be
a focus on early diagnoses, enhanced transparency of treatment options, and improved quality of care.Recommendation
Ensure that the psychological burden faced by lung cancer patients is addressed with pathways to access psychological support
services.
Rationale
Indicator 14: While the Netherlands’ guidelines include a discussion of the psychological burden of lung cancer and the
importance of psychological assessment, they do not provide a pathway for obtaining relevant support services in their lung
cancer guidelines. Providing a pathway in the guidelines provides clear and practical steps to ensure that patients can receive the
support that they need.Recommendation
Ensure that oncologists receive training in supportive and palliative care.
Rationale
Indicator 15: Training in supportive and palliative care is not integrated into the training of oncologists in the Netherlands.
Training ensures that clinicians understand the importance of supportive and palliative care—particularly the importance of
discussing this at time of diagnosis—and can better meet the needs of their patients.Recommendation
Cancer registries lack clinical data. In the Netherlands, a clinical cancer registry could provide helpful data.
Rationale
Indicator 16: The Netherlands’ cancer registry and vital registration data collection systems have been evaluated as being of
high and medium quality, respectively. Clinicians have suggested that a stronger clinical component to the cancer registry could
help to improve the overall care that lung cancer patients receive. Workshop participants noted that registries need better
information, including data on staging. Finally it was suggested that data registration could benefit from more central planning
and co-ordination, and that access to real world evidence would benefit a range of stakeholders.Opportunity 1
Opportunity 2
Opportunity 3
Opportunity 4