General practictioners' management of cancer in England: secondary analysis of data from the National Survey of NHS Patients-Cancer

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on a Cancer Fast-Track Programme

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted many aspects of clinical practice in oncology, particularly regarding early cancer diagnosis, sparking public health concerns that possible delays could increase the proportion of patients diagnosed at advanced stages. In 2009, a cancer fast-track program (CFP) was implemented at the Clinico-Malvarrosa Health Department in Valencia, Spain with the aim of shortening waiting times between suspected cancer symptoms, diagnosis and therapy initiation.

Objectives

The study aimed to explore the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on our cancer diagnosis fast-track program.

Methods

The program workflow (patients included and time periods) was analysed from the beginning of the state of alarm on March 16th, 2020 until March 15th, 2021. Data was compared with data from the same period of time from the year before (2019).

Results

During the pandemic year, 975 suspected cancer cases were submitted to the CFP. The number of submissions only decreased during times of highest COVID-19 incidence and stricter lockdown, and overall, referrals were slightly higher than in the previous 2 years. Cancer diagnosis was confirmed in 197 (24.1%) cases, among which 33% were urological, 23% breast, 16% gastrointestinal and 9% lung cancer. The median time from referral to specialist appointment was 13 days and diagnosis was reached at a median of 18 days. In confirmed cancer cases, treatment was started at around 30 days from time of diagnosis. In total, 61% of cancer disease was detected at early stage, 20% at locally advanced stage, and 19% at advanced stage, displaying time frames and case proportions similar to pre-pandemic years.

Conclusions

Our program has been able to maintain normal flow and efficacy despite the challenges of the current pandemic, and has proven a reliable tool to help primary care physicians referring suspected cancer patients.

Alignment between the patient's cancer worry and the GP's cancer suspicion and the association with the interval between first symptom presentation and referral: a cross-sectional study in Denmark

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GPs) have a key role in the diagnosis of cancer. It is crucial to identify factors influencing the decision to refer for suspected cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the alignment between the patient's cancer worry and the GP's suspicion of cancer in the first clinical encounter and the association with the time interval from the first symptom presentation until the first referral to specialist care, i.e. the primary care interval (PCI).

METHOD

The study was performed as a cross-sectional study using survey data on patients diagnosed with incident cancer in 2010 or 2016 and their GPs in Denmark. We defined four alignment groups: 1) patient worry and GP suspicion, 2)  GP suspicion only, 3) patient worry only, and 4) none of the two. A long PCI was defined as an interval longer than the 75th percentile.

RESULTS

Among the 3333 included patients, both patient worry and GP suspicion was seen in 39.5%, only GP suspicion was seen in 28.2%, only patient worry was seen in 13.6%, and neither patient worry nor GP suspicion was seen in 18.2%. The highest likelihood of long PCI was observed in group 4 (group 4 vs. group 1: PPR 3.99 (95% CI 3.34-4.75)), mostly pronounced for easy-to-diagnose cancer types.

CONCLUSION

Misalignment between the patient's worry and the GP's suspicion was common at the first cancer-related encounter. Importance should be given to the patient interview, due to a potential delayed GP referral among patients diagnosed with "easy-to-diagnose" cancer types presenting with unspecific symptoms.

Ten-year assessment of a cancer fast-track programme to connect primary care with oncology: reducing time from initial symptoms to diagnosis and treatment initiation

Background

Cancer is the second leading cause of mortality worldwide. Integrating different levels of care by implementing screening programmes, extending diagnostic tools and applying therapeutic advances may increase survival. We implemented a cancer fast-track programme (CFP) to shorten the time between suspected cancer symptoms, diagnosis and therapy initiation.

Patients and methods

Descriptive data were collected from the 10 years since the CFP was implemented (2009-2019) at the Clinico-Malvarrosa Health Department in Valencia, Spain. General practitioners (GPs), an oncology coordinator and 11 specialists designed guidelines for GP patient referral to the CFP, including criteria for breast, digestive, gynaecological, lung, urological, dermatological, head and neck, and soft tissue cancers. Patients with enlarged lymph nodes and constitutional symptoms were also considered. On identifying patients with suspected cancer, GPs sent a case proposal to the oncology coordinator. If criteria were met, an appointment was quickly made with the patient. We analysed the timeline of each stage of the process.

Results

A total of 4493 suspected cancer cases were submitted to the CFP, of whom 4019 were seen by the corresponding specialist. Cancer was confirmed in 1098 (27.3%) patients: breast cancer in 33%, urological cancers in 22%, gastrointestinal cancer in 19% and lung cancer in 15%. The median time from submission to cancer testing was 11 days, and diagnosis was reached in a median of 19 days. Treatment was started at a median of 34 days from diagnosis.

Conclusions

The findings of this study show that the interval from GP patient referral to specialist testing, cancer diagnosis and start of therapy can be reduced. Implementation of the CFP enabled most patients to begin curative intended treatment, and required only minimal resources in our setting.

•

Our CFP easily connects GPs and hospital specialists.

•

Our CFP shortens assessment time in patients with suspected cancer, adding to quality care.

•

Our CFP decreases emotional stress in patients without cancer.

Abdominal investigations in the year preceding a diagnosis of abdominal cancer: A register-based cohort study in Denmark

BACKGROUND

More than 11,500 abdominal cancers are yearly diagnosed in Denmark. Nevertheless, little is known about which investigations the patients undergo before a diagnosis of abdominal cancer. We aimed to investigate the frequency and timing of selected diagnostic investigations during the year preceding an abdominal cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide registry-based cohort study of patients aged ≥ 18 years who were diagnosed with a first-time abdominal cancer in 2014-2018. We included the following cancer types: oesophageal, gastric, colon, rectal, liver, gall bladder/biliary tract, pancreatic, endometrial, ovarian, kidney, and bladder cancer. Investigations of interest were transvaginal ultrasound, abdominal ultrasound, colonoscopy, gastroscopy, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, cystoscopy, hysteroscopy, abdominal computed tomography and abdominal magnetic resonance imaging. Generalised linear models were used to calculate incidence rate ratios to enable comparison of monthly rates of investigations.

RESULTS

All types of investigations were performed, with varying frequency, across the 11 abdominal cancer types in the year preceding the diagnosis. Increased use of investigations revealed that the timing of the onset differed for the different abdominal cancers, with increases seen 2-6 months before the diagnosis. Abdominal ultrasound, colonoscopy and computed tomography were the investigations with the earliest increase.

CONCLUSION

In the year before a diagnosis of an abdominal cancer, some patients appear to undergo investigations typically used to detect another cancer type. This indicates that a window of opportunity exists to diagnose some abdominal cancers at an earlier time point. Future studies should explore an alternative clinical pathway to promote earlier diagnosis of abdominal cancers.

Patient's worry about cancer and the general practitioner's suspicion of cancer or serious illness: A population-based study in Denmark

OBJECTIVE

A general practitioner's (GP's) suspicion of cancer is important to ensure early diagnosis of cancer. This study aimed to investigate the association between patients' cancer worry and GP's suspicion of cancer or serious illness.

METHODS

This population-based study was based on Danish register and questionnaire data from 4,175 incident cancer patients diagnosed in 2010 or 2016 and their GPs. The association between the patient's worry about cancer and their GP's suspicion of cancer or serious illness was estimated by generalised linear models with log link for the Poisson family and presented in prevalence rate ratios (PRR).

RESULTS

For 6 in 10 of the cases, the first consultation was categorised by absence of both or either patient worry or GP suspicion. When patients worried about cancer, the GPs were more likely to suspect cancer or serious illness in patients (PRR=1.26, (95%CI: 1.20-1.34)). For all levels of patient worry and most pronounced among very worried patients, GPs less often suspected cancer or serious illness in patients who presented with an ´intermediate´ or ´hard´ to diagnose cancer.

CONCLUSION

GPs were more likely to suspect cancer or serious illness in patients who worried about cancer at the first presentation.

Lung Cancer Pre-Diagnostic Pathways from First Presentation to Specialist Referral

Background: Lung cancer is often diagnosed at a late stage with high associated mortality. Timely diagnosis depends on timely referral to a respiratory specialist; however, in Canada, little is known about how patients move through primary care to get to a respiratory specialist. Accordingly, we aimed to identify and describe lung cancer pre-diagnostic pathways in primary care from first presentation to referral. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, patients with primary lung cancer were recruited using consecutive sampling (n = 50) from a lung cancer center in Montréal, Québec. Data on healthcare service utilization in primary care were collected from chart reviews and structured patient interviews and analyzed using latent class analysis to identify groups of patients with similar pre-diagnostic pathways. Each group was described based on patient- and tumor-related characteristics and the sequence of utilization activities. Results: 68% of the patients followed a pathway where family physician (FP) visits were dominant (“FP-centric”) and 32% followed a pathway where walk-in clinic and emergency department (ED) visits were dominant (“ED-centric”). Time to referral in the FP group was double that of the ED group (45 days (IQR: 12–111) vs. 22 (IQR: 5–69)) with more advanced disease (65% vs. 50%). In the FP group, 29% of the patients saw their FP three times or more before being referred and 41% had an ED visit. Conclusions: Our findings may reflect the challenge of diagnosing lung cancer in primary care, missed opportunities for earlier diagnosis, and a lack of integration between primary and specialist care.

Patient's travel distance to specialised cancer diagnostics and the association with the general practitioner's diagnostic strategy and satisfaction with the access to diagnostic procedures: an observational study in Denmark

Background

Research indicate that when general practitioners (GPs) refer their patients for specialist care, the patient often has long distance. This study had a twofold aim: in accordance to the GP’s suspicion of cancer, we investigated the association between: 1) cancer patient’s travel distance to the first specialised diagnostic facility and the GP’s diagnostic strategy and 2) cancer patient’s travel distance to the first specialised diagnostic facility and satisfaction with the waiting time and the availability of diagnostic investigations.

Method

This combined questionnaire- and registry-based study included incident cancer patients diagnosed in the last 6 months of 2016 where the GP had been involved in the diagnostic process of the patients prior to their diagnosis of cancer (n = 3455). The patient’s travel distance to the first specialised diagnostic facility was calculated by ArcGIS Network Analyst. The diagnostic strategy, cancer suspicion and the GP’s satisfaction with the waiting times and the available investigations were assessed from GP questionnaires.

Results

When the GP did not suspect cancer or serious illness, an insignificant tendency was seen that longer travel distance to the first specialised diagnostic facility increased the likelihood of the GP using ‘wait-and-see’ approach and ‘medical treatment’ as diagnostic strategies. The GPs of patients with travel distance longer than 49 km to the first specialised diagnostic facility were more likely to report dissatisfaction with the waiting time for requested diagnostic investigations (PR: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.20–3.28).

Conclusion

A insignificant tendency to use ‘wait-and-see’ and ‘medical treatment’ were seen among GPs of patients with long travel distance to the first diagnostic facility when the GP did not suspect cancer or serious illness. Long distance was associated with higher probability of GP dissatisfaction with the waiting time for diagnostic investigations.

Cancer diagnostic delays and travel distance to health services: A nationwide cohort study in Denmark

BACKGROUND

This study aims to investigate the association between distance to health services and intervals in the cancer diagnostic pathway, and explore whether the diagnostic difficulty of the cancer influences this association.

METHOD

A nationwide cohort study was conducted based on data from both questionnaires and registries. Danish cancer patients diagnosed in 2005-2016 and their general practitioner (GP) were included if enrolled in the Danish Cancer in Primary Care (CaP) cohort (n = 37,872). The CaP cohorts provided data on intervals assessed by patients and GPs. The Geographical Information System (GIS) was used to calculate travel distances from the residence of the patient to their GP surgery and to the hospital of diagnosis.

RESULTS

Longer travel distance to the hospital of diagnosis was associated with longer diagnostic interval. This association was strongest in the period before the implementation of Cancer Patient Pathways (CPP) in 2010. Patients with a cancer categorised as ´hard to diagnose´ contributed mostly to the association. Longer travel distance to the GP was associated with shorter patient interval and primary care interval for patients diagnosed with cancer types ´intermediate to diagnose´.

CONCLUSION

Travel distance to cancer diagnostic health care services was associated with interval length in the diagnostic pathway. This association was less pronounced in the period after introducing CPPs and also strongly depending of the underlying cancer type and symptomatology.

Continuity of care in general practice at cancer diagnosis (COOC-GP study): a national cohort study of 2853 patients

BACKGROUND

At cancer diagnosis, it is unclear whether continuity of care (COC) between the patient and GP is safeguarded.

AIM

To identify patient-GP loss of COC around the time of, and in the year after, a cancer diagnosis, together with its determinants.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A post-hoc analysis of data from a prospective cohort of GPs in France, taken from a survey by the Observatoire de la Médecine Générale.

METHOD

A prospective GP cohort (n = 96) filed data on patients who were diagnosed with incident cancer between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2010. COC was assessed by ascertaining the frequency of consultations and the maximal interval between them. (In France, patients see their referring/named GP in most cases.) A loss of COC was measured during the trimester before and the year after the cancer diagnosis, and the results compared with those from a 1-year baseline period before cancer had been diagnosed. A loss of COC was defined as a longer interval (that is, the maximum number of days) between consultations in the measurement periods than at baseline. Determinants of the loss in COC were assessed with univariate and multivariate logistic regression models.

RESULTS

In total, 2853 patients were included; the mean age was 66.1 years. Of these, 1440 (50.5%) were women, 389 (13.6%) had metastatic cancer, and 769 (27.0%) had a comorbidity. The mean number of consultations increased up to, and including, the first trimester after diagnosis. Overall, 26.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 25.3 to 28.6) of patients had a loss of COC in the trimester before the diagnosis, and 22.3% (95% CI = 20.7 to 23.9) in the year after. Increasing comorbidity score was independently associated with a reduction in the loss of COC during the year after diagnosis (adjusted odds ratio [OR] comorbidity versus no comorbidity 0.61, 95% CI = 0.48 to 0.79); the same was true for metastatic status (adjusted OR metastasis versus no metastasis 0.49, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.70).

CONCLUSION

As COC is a core value for GPs and for most patients, special care should be taken to prevent a loss of COC around the time of a cancer diagnosis, and in the year after.

Abdominal symptoms and cancer in the abdomen: prospective cohort study in European primary care

BACKGROUND

Different abdominal symptoms may signal cancer, but their role is unclear.

AIM

To examine associations between abdominal symptoms and subsequent cancer diagnosed in the abdominal region.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective cohort study comprising 493 GPs from surgeries in Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Scotland, Belgium, and the Netherlands.

METHOD

Over a 10-day period, the GPs recorded consecutive consultations and noted: patients who presented with abdominal symptoms pre-specified on the registration form; additional data on non-specific symptoms; and features of the consultation. Eight months later, data on all cancer diagnoses among all study patients in the participating general practices were requested from the GPs.

RESULTS

Consultations with 61 802 patients were recorded and abdominal symptoms were documented in 6264 (10.1%) patients. Malignancy, both abdominal and non-abdominal, was subsequently diagnosed in 511 patients (0.8%). Among patients with a new cancer in the abdomen (n = 251), 175 (69.7%) were diagnosed within 180 days after consultation. In a multivariate model, the highest sex- and age-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was for the single symptom of rectal bleeding (HR 19.1, 95% confidence interval = 8.7 to 41.7). Positive predictive values of >3% were found for macroscopic haematuria, rectal bleeding, and involuntary weight loss, with variations according to age and sex. The three symptoms relating to irregular bleeding had particularly high specificity in terms of colorectal, uterine, and bladder cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

A patient with undiagnosed cancer may present with symptoms or no symptoms. Irregular bleeding must always be explained. Abdominal pain occurs with all types of abdominal cancer and several symptoms may signal colorectal cancer. The findings are important as they influence how GPs think and act, and how they can contribute to an earlier diagnosis of cancer.

Suspected cancer diagnoses made by general practitioners in a population with subsequently confirmed cancer diagnoses in Germany: a retrospective study of 31,628 patients

The goal of the present study was to analyze the prevalence and risk factors of suspected cancer diagnoses made by general practitioners (GP) in a population with subsequently confirmed cancer diagnoses in Germany. This study included patients aged 18 years or older who received an initial documentation of a confirmed cancer diagnosis from 1,262 German GP between January and December 2016 (index date). The main outcome measure of the study was the rate of suspected cancer diagnoses made by GP within one year prior to the index date. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to estimate the relationship between defined demographic and clinical variables and suspected cancer diagnoses. This study included 31,628 individuals. Within the year prior to the confirmed cancer diagnosis, 5% of the population received suspected cancer diagnoses. Patients in the age groups 41–50, 51–60, and 61–70 years were more likely to receive a suspected cancer diagnosis from a GP than those in the age group > 80 years (OR ranging from 1.30 to 1.38). Lung cancer, skin cancer, prostate cancer, and leukemia were associated with an increase in such odds when compared to cancers of the digestive organs (OR ranging from 1.56 to 2.26), whereas female genital organ cancers were associated with decreased odds (OR = 0.63). Overall, approximately 5% of patients received suspected diagnoses of cancer prior to their confirmed diagnoses. Suspected cancer diagnoses were associated with age and several types of cancer.

Abdominal symptoms in general practice: Frequency, cancer suspicions raised, and actions taken by GPs in six European countries. Cohort study with prospective registration of cancer

BACKGROUND

Abdominal symptoms are diagnostically challenging to general practitioners (GPs): although common, they may indicate cancer. In a prospective cohort of patients, we examined abdominal symptom frequency, initial diagnostic suspicion, and actions of GPs in response to abdominal symptoms.

METHODS

Over a 10-day period, 493 GPs in Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Scotland, recorded consecutive consultations: sex, date of birth and any specified abdominal symptoms. For patients with abdominal symptoms, additional data on non-specific symptoms, GPs' diagnostic suspicion, and features of the consultation were noted. Data on all cancer diagnoses among all included patients were requested from the GPs eight months later.

FINDINGS

Consultations with 61802 patients were recorded. Abdominal symptoms were recorded in 6264 (10.1%) patients. A subsequent malignancy was reported in 511 patients (0.8%): 441 (86.3%) had a new cancer, 70 (13.7%) a recurrent cancer. Abdominal symptoms were noted in 129 (25.2%) of cancer patients (P < 0.001), rising to 34.5% for the 89 patients with cancer located in the abdominal region. PPV for any cancer given any abdominal symptom was 2.1%. In symptomatic patients diagnosed with cancer, GPs noted a suspicion of cancer for 85 (65.9%) versus 1895 (30.9%) when there was no subsequent cancer (P < 0.001). No suspicion was noted in 32 (24.8%) cancer patients. The GP's intuitive cancer suspicion was independently associated with a subsequent new cancer diagnosis (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.15-3.89). Laboratory tests were ordered for 45.4% of symptomatic patients, imaging for 10.4%, referral or hospitalization for 20.0%: all were more frequent in subsequent cancer patients (P < 0.001).

INTERPRETATION

Abdominal symptoms pointed to abdominal cancers rather than to other cancers. However, the finding of abdominal symptoms in only one third of patients with an abdominal cancer, and the lack of cancer suspicion in a quarter of symptomatic cancer patients, provide challenges for GPs' diagnostic thinking and referral practices.

Physician cooperation in outpatient cancer care. An amplified secondary analysis of qualitative interview data

The importance of outpatient cancer care services is increasing due to the growing number of patients having or having had cancer. However, little is known about cooperation among physicians in outpatient settings. To understand what inter- and multidisciplinary care means in community settings, we conducted an amplified secondary analysis that combined qualitative interview data with 42 general practitioners (GPs), 21 oncologists and 21 urologists that mainly worked in medical practices in Germany. We compared their perspectives on cooperation relationships in cancer care. Our results indicate that all participants regarded cooperation as a prerequisite for good cancer care. Oncologists and urologists mainly reported cooperating for tumour-specific treatment tasks, while GPs' reasoning for cooperation was more patient-centred. While oncologists and urologists reported experiencing reciprocal communication with other physicians, GPs had to gather the information they needed. GPs seldom reported engaging in formal cooperation structures, while for specialists, participation in formal spaces of cooperation, such as tumour boards, facilitated a more frequent and informal discussion of patients, for instance on the phone. Further research should focus on ways to foster GPs' integration in cancer care and evaluate if this can be reached by incorporating GPs in formal cooperation structures such as tumour boards.

French general practitioners' sense of isolation in the management of elderly cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Cancer care in people over 75 years of age is particularly complex and requires collaboration between oncologists, geriatricians, GPs and other professional and family carers. To improve the care pathways for elderly people living with cancer, the French health authorities have created a network of oncologists and geriatricians; however, GPs experience difficulties in establishing their place in this network.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyse the impressions of French GPs involved in the care of elderly patients with cancer, including their feelings regarding their relationships with their oncologist and geriatrician colleagues.

METHODS

A qualitative approach using focus groups was employed. The proceedings of these focus groups were recorded, retranscribed and subjected to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Although heavily involved in the care of their elderly patients living with cancer, the GPs who participated reported feeling isolated in their role at each step during the course of the disease. The principal themes addressed were screening and diagnosis, therapeutic decisions, multidisciplinary consultation meetings, the announcement of the diagnosis and monitoring at home. Their relationships with their oncologist colleagues showed much room for improvement, and they were unaware of the oncogeriatric network.

CONCLUSIONS

Improving the communication between GPs, oncologists and geriatric medicine seems to be one response to the isolation that GPs feel when caring for older people with cancer. At the primary care level, integration of GPs into the oncogeriatric network and the creation of a cancer care communication system in collaboration with the relevant hospital teams may be effective solutions.

Post-sampling mortality and non-response patterns in the English Cancer Patient Experience Survey: Implications for epidemiological studies based on surveys of cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Surveys of the experience of cancer patients are increasingly being introduced in different countries and used in cancer epidemiology research. Sampling processes, post-sampling mortality and survey non-response can influence the representativeness of cancer patient surveys.

METHODS

We examined predictors of post-sampling mortality and non-response among patients initially included in the sampling frame of the English Cancer Patient Experience Survey. We also compared the respondents' diagnostic case-mix to other relevant populations of cancer patients, including incident and prevalent cases.

RESULTS

Of 109,477 initially sampled cancer patients, 6273 (5.7%) died between sampling and survey mail-out. Older age and diagnosis of brain, lung and pancreatic cancer were associated with higher risk of post-sampling mortality. The overall response rate was 67% (67,713 respondents), being >70% for the most affluent patients and those diagnosed with colon or breast cancer and <50% for Asian or Black patients, those under 35 and those diagnosed with brain cancer. The diagnostic case-mix of respondents varied substantially from incident or prevalent cancer cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Respondents to the English Cancer Patient Experience Survey represent a population of recently treated cancer survivors. Although patient survey data can provide unique insights for improving cancer care quality, features of survey populations need to be acknowledged when analysing and interpreting findings from studies using such data.

Primary care physicians and oncologists are partners in cancer announcement

PURPOSE

The primary care physician (PCP) is central to cancer patients' management. Announcement of the diagnosis is a critical time for patients, even if they wish to be fully informed. The French National Cancer Plan, developed 10 years ago, includes a diagnosis disclosure procedure (DDP) to be used by oncologists, which makes specific provision for a time of communication with PCPs. So, we asked PCPs about their role in cancer announcement since the launching of the DDP.

METHODS

A cross-sectional prospective study by postal questionnaire was sent to 500 PCPs in the largest region of France. It addressed (1) the characteristics of cancer disclosure, (2) PCPs' source of information of the diagnosis, (3) time of disclosure, (4) information exchange, and (5) the physicians' knowledge of the DDP.

RESULTS

The response rate was 48 %. In 20 % of cases, oncologists delegated the announcement to PCPs. In 19 % of cases, it was the patient or their family who informed the PCP of the diagnosis. We identified three announcement phases of cancer diagnosis in the physicians' clinical practice: pre-disclosure, disclosure, and repeat disclosure. In 57 % of cases, PCPs lacked information on prognosis and in 60 % on treatment. Regarding the DDP, nearly half of PCPs did not know the procedure itself or its content.

CONCLUSION

PCPs announce the cancer diagnosis, even if they have not received the necessary information to do so. The DDP needs to be adapted for use in primary care practice.

Predictive values of GPs' suspicion of serious disease: a population-based follow-up study

BACKGROUND

Knowledge is sparse on the prevalence of suspicion of cancer and other serious diseases in general practice. Likewise, little is known about the possible implications of this suspicion on future healthcare use and diagnoses.

AIM

To study the prevalence of GPs' suspicions of cancer or other serious diseases and analyse how this suspicion predicted the patients' healthcare use and diagnoses of serious disease.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective population-based cohort study of 4518 patients consulting 404 GPs in a mix of urban, semi-urban and rural practices in Central Denmark Region during 2008-2009.

METHOD

The GPs registered consultations in 1 work day, including information on their suspicion of the presence of cancer or another serious disease. The patients were followed up for use of healthcare services and new diagnoses through the use of national registers.

RESULTS

Prevalence of suspicion was 5.7%. Suspicion was associated with an increase in referrals (prevalence ratio [PR] = 2.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.22 to 2.96), especially for diagnostic imaging (PR = 3.95, 95% CI = 2.80 to 5.57), increased risk of a new diagnosis of cancer or another serious disease within 2 months (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.98, 95% CI = 1.93 to 4.62)--especially for cancer (HR = 7.55, 95% CI = 2.66 to 21.39)--and increased use of general practice (relative risk [RR] = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.24) and hospital visits (RR = 1.90, 95% CI = 1.62 to 2.23). The positive predictive value of a GP suspicion was 9.8% (95% CI = 6.4 to 14.1) for cancer or another serious disease within 2 months.

CONCLUSION

A GP suspicion of serious disease warrants further investigation, and the organisation of the healthcare system should ensure direct access from the primary sector to specialised tests.

The Danish cancer pathway for patients with serious non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer-a cross-sectional study of patient characteristics and cancer probability

BACKGROUND

A Danish cancer pathway has been implemented for patients with serious non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer (NSSC-CPP). The initiative is one of several to improve the long diagnostic interval and the poor survival of Danish cancer patients. However, little is known about the patients investigated under this pathway. We aim to describe the characteristics of patients referred from general practice to the NSSC-CPP and to estimate the cancer probability and distribution in this population.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed, including all patients referred to the NSSC-CPP at the hospitals in Aarhus or Silkeborg in the Central Denmark Region between March 2012 and March 2013. Data were based on a questionnaire completed by the patient's general practitioner (GP) combined with nationwide registers. Cancer probability was the percentage of new cancers per investigated patient. Associations between patient characteristics and cancer diagnosis were estimated with prevalence rate ratios (PRRs) from a generalised linear model.

RESULTS

The mean age of all 1278 included patients was 65.9 years, and 47.5 % were men. In total, 16.2 % of all patients had a cancer diagnosis after six months; the most common types were lung cancer (17.9 %), colorectal cancer (12.6 %), hematopoietic tissue cancer (10.1 %) and pancreatic cancer (9.2 %). All patients in combination had more than 80 different symptoms and 51 different clinical findings at referral. Most symptoms were non-specific and vague; weight loss and fatigue were present in more than half of all cases. The three most common clinical findings were 'affected general condition' (35.8 %), 'GP's gut feeling' (22.5 %) and 'findings from the abdomen' (13.0 %). A strong association was found between GP-estimated cancer risk at referral and probability of cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

In total, 16.2 % of the patients referred through the NSSC-CPP had cancer. They constituted a heterogeneous group with many different symptoms and clinical findings. The GP's gut feeling was a common reason for referral which proved to be a strong predictor of cancer. The GP's overall estimation of the patient's risk of cancer at referral was associated with the probability of finding cancer.

Using routinely collected data to stratify prostate cancer patients into phases of care in the United Kingdom: implications for resource allocation and the cancer survivorship programme

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy in British men. The increasing use of PSA screening test has resulted in many more patients being diagnosed with this condition. Advances in its treatment have improved the survival rate among these patients. By 2040, the prevalence of prostate cancer survivors is expected to reach 830 000. Many of them will require medical support for the management of their progressive disease or long-term toxicities from previous treatments. Successful implementation of the cancer survivorship programme among these patients depends on a good understanding of their demand on the health care system. The aim of this study is to segment the population of prostate cancer survivors into different needs groups and to quantify them with respect to their phase of care.

METHODS

Incidence, survival, prevalence and mortality data collected and reported by cancer registries across the United Kingdom have been used for the current study to provide indicative estimates as to the number of prostate cancer patients in each phase of the care pathway in a year.

RESULTS

The majority of prostate cancer patients are in the post-treatment monitoring phase. Around a fifth of the patients are either receiving treatment or in the recovery and readjustment phase having completed their treatment in the preceding year. Thirteen percent have not received any anticancer treatment, a further 12% (32 000) have developed metastatic disease and 4% are in the final stage of their lives.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of our estimates, patients undergoing post-treatment monitoring phase will constitute the biggest group among prostate cancer survivors. The pressure to provide adequate follow-up care to these patients will be a challenge. There is limited data available to definitively quantify the number of prostate cancer patients who follow different pathways of care, and we hope this study has highlighted the importance of collecting and reporting of such data to help future health care planning for these patients.

Direct-access to abdominal ultrasonic investigation from general practice—the role in earlier cancer diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Abdominal ultrasound (US) is a safe and low-cost diagnostic tool for various abdominal symptoms. Direct-access to US from general practice has been suggested as a feasible option to promote earlier cancer diagnosis because abdominal cancer often presents with non-specific and vague symptoms, and the exact location may be difficult to identify on the basis of symptoms alone.

OBJECTIVE

To describe patterns of use and cancer prevalence in referred patients when providing Danish GPs with direct-access to hospital-based US.

METHODS

In an observational study, GPs were given the opportunity to either refer patients directly to US or through a waiting-list at Vejle Regional Hospital in Denmark; 701 patients were included between 1 August 2009 and 31 January 2010. Data were retrieved from the local Radiology Information System, GP referrals and the Danish Cancer Registry.

RESULTS

GPs referred 60% of all patients to direct-access US. Cancer was diagnosed in 19 (2.7%) of the referred patients within 6 months after the US investigation. US gave rise to the suspicion of cancer in 11 of these patients (57.9%); 10 of these had been referred to direct-access US. At least one non-malignant diagnosis resulted from US in 59.5% of the cases, while 37.8% of the cases had no final diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

The findings in this study might indicate that GPs refer patients assessed to have a higher risk of cancer through direct-access US. The finding was statistically non-significant, and further research is required to confirm this result.

Cancer suspicion in general practice: the role of symptoms and patient characteristics, and their association with subsequent cancer

BACKGROUND

Awareness of detail in ambiguous complaints may help GPs suspect cancer when a malignancy is present.

AIM

To study the contribution of symptoms and patient characteristics to GPs' suspicions of cancer being present, and to what degree these suspicions were confirmed.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective cohort study of patients in 283 rural and urban general practices throughout Norway.

METHOD

During patient consultations (over a period of 10 days) GPs registered whether there was a suspicion of cancer when a patient presented with at least one of seven focal symptoms and three general symptoms commonly considered to be warning signs of cancer. Follow-up questionnaires were sent to GPs 6-7 months later, requesting information on any subsequent diagnosis of cancer in these patients.

RESULTS

Out of 51 073 patients, 6321 presented with warning signs of cancer; of these, 106 had a subsequent cancer diagnosis. Of the patients presenting with warning signs, 1515 (24%) patients were suspected of having cancer; this was correct for 3.8% of suspected cases. Of the 106 patients diagnosed with cancer who presented with warning signs, cancer was suspected in 58 (54.7%). GPs' correct cancer suspicions were six times more frequent than their erroneous lack of suspicion. Multiple symptoms, previous cancer, comorbidity, and multiple consultations increased the probability of cancer, but only multiple symptoms and previous cancer increased suspicion. Suspicion led to an increase in the number of diagnostic procedures undertaken. The proportion of cancer cases where GPs recorded a lack of suspicion was relatively small, but important.

CONCLUSION

Selected symptoms appropriately resulted in GPs suspecting cancer. Comorbidity and multiple consultations were underestimated by GPs as factors associated with cancer. Cancer suspicion should rely on symptoms in combination with other relevant information.

A feasibility study examining the effect on lung cancer diagnosis of offering a chest X-ray to higher-risk patients with chest symptoms: protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In order to improve lung cancer survival in the UK, a greater proportion of resectable cancers must be diagnosed. It is likely that resectability rates would be increased by more timely diagnosis. Aside from screening, the only way of achieving this is to reduce the time to diagnosis in symptomatic cancers. Currently, lung cancers are mainly diagnosed by general practitioners (GPs) using the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines for urgent referral for chest X-ray, which recommend urgent imaging or referral for patients who have one of a number of chest symptoms for more than 3 weeks. We are proposing to expand this recommendation to include one of a number of chest symptoms of any duration in higher-risk patients.

METHODS/DESIGN

We intend to conduct a trial of imaging in these higher-risk patients and compare it with NICE guidelines to see if imaging improves stage at diagnosis and resection rates. This trial would have to be large (and consequently resource-intensive) because most of these patients will not have lung cancer, making optimal design crucial. We are therefore conducting a pilot trial that will ascertain the feasibility of running a full trial and provide key information that will be required in order to design the full trial.

DISCUSSION

This trial will assess the feasibility and inform the design of a large, UK-wide, clinical trial of a change to the NICE guidelines for urgent referral for chest X-ray for suspected lung cancer. It utilizes a combination of workshop, health economic, quality of life, qualitative, and quantitative methods in order to fully assess feasibility.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01344005.

Frequency of 'warning signs of cancer' in Norwegian general practice, with prospective recording of subsequent cancer

BACKGROUND

Early diagnosis of cancer is an important challenge in general practice. Symptoms are the most common starting points.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between symptoms presented and subsequent cancer.

DESIGN

A cohort study of all patients seen consecutively by GPs. Prospective recording of cancer diagnosis, new cancer or new recurrence.

SETTING

Two hundred and eighty-three general practice surgeries and 10 working days.

METHOD

During patient consultations, GPs registered seven focal symptoms and three general symptoms, commonly considered as warning signs of cancer (WSC). Follow-up 6-11 months later with registration of any subsequent diagnosis of cancer was done.

RESULTS

Of 51 073 patients, 6321 (12.4%) had recordings of 7704 WSC. During a median follow-up period of 8 months, 263 patients were diagnosed with cancer and 59 of them with recurrence of a previously diagnosed cancer. Of the cancer patients, 106 (40%) had presented one or more WSC during a preceding consultation. Examined symptoms had likelihood ratios for cancer from 1.5 to 8.2 and positive predictive values (PPVs) from 0.8% to 3.8%. Limited to older age groups, PPVs were a little higher. General symptoms were rarely associated with cancer unless a focal symptom had been recorded as well. Multiple symptoms increased the probability of cancer.

CONCLUSION

12.4% of GP patients presented with WSC. A general symptom may have cancer diagnostic value, but usually, only when it occurs along with a focal symptom. PPV of any single symptom is low, and decisions about referral require additional information.

Use of general practice, diagnostic investigations and hospital services before and after cancer diagnosis - a population-based nationwide registry study of 127,000 incident adult cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Knowledge of patterns in cancer patients' health care utilisation around the time of diagnosis may guide health care resource allocation and provide important insights into this groups' demand for health care services. The health care need of patients with comorbid conditions far exceeds the oncology capacity and it is therefore important to elucidate the role of both primary and secondary care. The aim of this paper is to describe the use of health care services amongst incident cancer patients in Denmark one year before and one year after cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

The present study is a national population-based case-control (1:10) registry study. All incident cancer patients (n = 127,210) diagnosed between 2001 and 2006 aged 40 years or older were identified in the Danish Cancer Registry. Data from national health registries were provided for all cancer patients and for 1,272,100 controls. Monthly consultation frequencies, monthly proportions of persons receiving health services and three-month incidence rate ratios for one year before and one year after the cancer diagnosis were calculated. Data were analysed separately for women and men.

RESULTS

Three months before their diagnosis, cancer patients had twice as many general practitioner (GP) consultations, ten to eleven times more diagnostic investigations and five times more hospital contacts than the reference population. The demand for GP services peaked one month before diagnosis, the demand for diagnostic investigations one month after diagnosis and the number of hospital contacts three months after diagnosis. The proportion of cancer patients receiving each of these three types of health services remained more than 10% above that of the reference population from two months before diagnosis until the end of the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer patients' health service utilisation rose dramatically three months before their diagnosis. This increase applied to all services in general throughout the first year after diagnosis and to the patients' use of hospital contacts in particular. Cancer patients' heightened demand for GP services one year after their diagnosis highlights the importance of close coordination and communication between the primary and the secondary healthcare sector.

A qualitative study of unmet needs and interactions with primary care among cancer survivors

Introduction:

Despite increasing numbers, there is little research investigating the long-term needs of cancer survivors. The aim of this study is to explore the experiences of individuals who have survived at least 5 years following a cancer diagnosis, and to describe perceived unmet needs and interactions with primary care.

Methods:

Forty long-term survivors of breast, colorectal and prostate cancer were purposively selected for an in-depth qualitative study. We aimed for a maximum variation sample according to cancer site, gender, time since diagnosis, cancer needs, anxiety and depression. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded thematically using a grounded theory approach.

Results:

Analysis of the interview data is presented in four subthemes: the role they perceived for the general practitioner (GP), unmet needs, reasons for not using primary care for needs they perceived as cancer related, and ongoing care for cancer-related issues. The majority of cancer survivors did not see a role for their GP in their long-term care related to their cancer diagnosis as most considered that they did not need active follow-up, but some expressed a need for psychological services and information on possible long-term effects. Cancer survivors cited three main reasons for not using GP services in relation to their cancer diagnosis: GPs were seen as non-experts in cancer; they were perceived as too busy; and a lack of continuity within primary care made it difficult to talk about long-term issues. There was a wide variation in schedules and notification of PSA tests among the prostate cancer survivors.

Discussion:

The results from this project suggest that some cancer survivors have specific emotional and physical needs that could benefit from input from their primary care team, but not all cancer survivors look to their GP for their long-term cancer-related care. Better information care planning is required from specialists in order to identify those who would benefit most.

Patients' confidence in their GP before and after being diagnosed with cancer

BACKGROUND

General practice plays an important role in the cancer care pathway. The initial diagnostic phase may be crucial for the relationship between the patient and the GP.

AIM

The aim was to describe whether patients' confidence in their GP changed after a cancer diagnosis, and analyse whether the change in confidence was associated with doctor delay.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Population-based cohort study with 1892 questionnaires sent to patients and their GPs in general practices in the former Aarhus County, Denmark.

METHOD

Information on patients' confidence in their GP was obtained from the patient questionnaire. Information on doctor delay was obtained from the GPs and defined as a period of 14 days or more from the date of first symptom presentation to the GP until cancer-specific investigation was initiated.

RESULTS

Before the cancer diagnosis, 88.4% of the patients had confidence in their GP, which decreased to 80.0% after the diagnosis (P<0.001); 15.8% of the patients who experienced no doctor delay reported a decrease in confidence after the cancer diagnosis, compared with 29.1% of the patients with a doctor delay (P<0.001). Patients presenting with alarm symptoms and experiencing doctor delay were 3.8 times more likely to lose confidence compared with those presenting with alarm symptoms who experienced no doctor delay (P = 0.048).

CONCLUSION

The majority of the patients had high levels of confidence in their GP before, as well as after, the cancer diagnosis. Nevertheless, a substantial amount had low confidence in the GP, especially when experiencing doctor delay in the initial phase of the pathway.

Patient delay in presentation of possible cancer symptoms: the contribution of knowledge and attitudes in a population sample from the United kingdom

BACKGROUND

Qualitative studies implicate knowledge of cancer symptoms and attitudes towards help-seeking as important factors in patient delay. The present study uses quantitative data from a population-based survey to test the hypotheses that (a) a greater knowledge of early cancer symptoms is associated with a higher likelihood of having appraised a symptom as possibly due to cancer, and (b) more negative attitudes towards help-seeking are associated with a lower likelihood of having sought medical advice for that symptom.

METHODS

Two thousand and seventy-one adults were asked whether they had experienced a symptom that they worried might be cancer in the past 3 months, and if so, whether they had seen a doctor. Respondents also completed the Cancer Awareness Measure (CAM) assessing symptom knowledge and barriers to help-seeking.

RESULTS

Two hundred and thirty-six (11.4%) respondents reported having experienced a possible cancer symptom. In logistic regression analyses controlling for age, sex, and self-rated health, higher CAM symptom knowledge scores were associated with a greater likelihood of having experienced a possible cancer symptom (odds ratio = 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.17). Of those who had experienced a symptom, 75% (177/236) had seen a doctor. Higher scores on the CAM barriers scale were associated with being less likely to have seen a doctor (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Better knowledge of the signs and symptoms of cancer might help people recognize possible cancer symptoms and therefore reduce appraisal delay, whereas more positive attitudes towards help-seeking might reduce behavioral delay.

IMPACT

Campaigns to educate the public about cancer symptoms and reduce help-seeking barriers could play a role in promoting early diagnosis.

The interface of primary and oncology specialty care: from symptoms to diagnosis

Symptomatic individuals presenting to their primary care providers may need further evaluation and/or testing to determine whether a cancer is present. A number of issues arise in determining who needs further testing, what tests are needed, which specialists need to be involved, and how the testing can be organized and supported within a specific health-care system within a timely, coordinated, and cost-efficient manner. This article explores the challenges in the interface of primary care providers and specialists, includes evidence from prior research, and proposes research opportunities to understand and improve this phase of care.

Are GPs under-investigating older patients presenting with symptoms of ovarian cancer? Observational study using General Practice Research Database

BACKGROUND

Recent studies suggest that older patients in the United Kingdom are not benefiting as much from improvements in cancer treatments as their younger counterparts. We investigate whether this might be partly due to differential referral rates using ovarian cancer as an example.

METHODS

From the General Practice Research Database (GPRD), we identified all women aged 40-80 years on 1 June 2002 with a Read code for ovarian cancer between 1 June 2002 and 31 May 2007. Using these records, we compared the GPRD incidence of ovarian cancer with rates compiled from the UK cancer registries and investigated the relationship between age and coded investigations for suspected ovarian cancer.

RESULTS

The GPRD rates peaked earlier, at 70-74, and were lower than registry rates for nearly all ages particularly for patients over 59. The proportion investigated or referred by the GP decreased significantly with age and delays between first coded symptom and investigation showed a U-shaped distribution by age.

CONCLUSIONS

GPs appear to be less likely to recognise and to refer patients presenting with ovarian cancer as they get older. If our findings extend to other cancers, lack of or delays in referral to secondary care may partly explain poor UK cancer mortality rates of older people.

What Information Do General Practitioners Need to Care for Patients with Lung Cancer? A Survey of General Practitioners Perceptions

General practitioners (GPs) are an integral part of the multidisciplinary team that care for patients with lung cancer. It is essential that patient information including results of tests, management plans, treatment, and follow-up arrangements are communicated between hospital-based carers and the community-based GR. The aim of this study was to explore GPs' views about the information they need from hospital-based health professionals in the management of their patients with lung cancer. This exploration is undertaken within the context of a multidisciplinary model of care, a relatively new concept in service delivery for cancer patients. Data were collected using a questionnaire that was distributed to the population of 433 GPs from one Australian regional Division of General Practice. Questions related to from whom, what, when and how GPs would like to receive information from the multidisciplinary hospital-based lung cancer team. GPs reported that they wanted information from all members of the multidisciplinary hospital-based lung cancer team, not just physicians. The key triggers for communication included: any change in the patient's condition; following initial outpatient visit; at admission and discharge; and following treatment milestones. Both medical and social information were seen as important to GPs and there was strong support to receive information electronically. This study illustrates the desire by GPs to receive information from all members of the hospital-based lung cancer team if it is relevant to the ongoing care of their patient. Technology-enabled solutions, such as an electronic multidisciplinary discharge summary, the electronic health record and the person-controlled electronic health record, offer strategies to improve both timeliness and access to information.

Building a shared patient record for breast cancer management: a French Delphi study

Before electronic records become operational, patient-held records provide an opportunity to improve communication between patients and healthcare professionals. Our aim was to design the appropriate organization, layout and content for such a shared record for breast cancer management, based on a consensus between the various stakeholders. We therefore conducted a Delphi study within a working group of 48 members, including patients, oncologists, general practitioners, nurses and other professionals. The procedure featured three rounds during which participants' judgements were collected via mailed questionnaires and quantitative and qualitative feedback was provided on a regular basis. These three rounds were followed by an evaluation phase. Forty members (83%) participated in the three rounds. According to the agreement reached, the shared record was expected to include a front summary card, four sections for groups of users authorized to write down or insert information in the record (patient, physicians, medical auxiliaries and other healthcare professionals), and one section for medical imaging files. In addition, the record was to include specific categories of information as subsections within each of the various user sections. The participant satisfaction rate was over 90% for all aspects of the procedure, with the exception of interaction within the working group (79%).

General practitioners' role in cancer care: a French-Norwegian study

Background

In cancer care, a GP's work is rarely defined clearly. Our aim was to assess GPs' work with cancer patients in France and in Norway, where the roles of the GP and the organization of the system are rather different.

Findings

A questionnaire with 40 closed-ended questions about GP involvement in diagnosis, treatment, follow-up and terminal care was constructed and mailed to samples of GPs. The patients had seen the doctor at least once over the past year. In France 1679 and in Norway 386 individual patient questionnaires were completed. GPs have a major role in the diagnosis of cancer, and this role varies according to cancer type. The GPs participated actively in different phases of follow-up after cancer treatment. Low response rates do not allow direct comparison between countries, but higher PSA screening rates in France seem to increase the percentage of patients diagnosed after screening rather than after a clinical suspicion. Interaction between GPs and specialists during cancer treatment and follow-up was important in both countries.

Conclusion

Both in France and in Norway GPs participate actively in cancer care. Early clinical diagnosis is a challenge. More research is needed about how GPs can improve their early diagnostic work. Organisational issues may influence cancer responsibilities for the GP, and national health systems should be challenged to look at possible new roles for GPs in cancer care. Medical training, both pre- and post-graduate, should prepare doctors for collaboration between primary and secondary care, particularly important in cancer care.

Diagnostic delay and complications for older adults with multiple myeloma

Increased attention to timely diagnosis motivated us to study 5483 patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma using Medicare claims linked to tumor registries in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results programme. We calculated the time between initial visits for anemia or back pain and for myeloma diagnosis, and used logistic regression to predict the likelihood of diagnostic delay, and also the likelihood of renal or skeletal complications. The median time between sign or symptom and myeloma diagnosis was 99 days. Patients with anemia, back pain and comorbidities were more likely to experience diagnostic delay (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.3-2.0). Diagnosis while hospitalised (OR 2.5, 95% CI 2.2-2.9) and chemotherapy treatment within 6 months of diagnosis (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.6) significantly predicted complications; diagnostic delay did not (OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.8-1.1). Our data suggest that complications are more strongly associated with health status and myeloma severity than with diagnostic delays.

Determining the date of diagnosis--is it a simple matter? The impact of different approaches to dating diagnosis on estimates of delayed care for ovarian cancer in UK primary care

Background

Studies of cancer incidence and early management will increasingly draw on routine electronic patient records. However, data may be incomplete or inaccurate. We developed a generalisable strategy for investigating presenting symptoms and delays in diagnosis using ovarian cancer as an example.

Methods

The General Practice Research Database was used to investigate the time between first report of symptom and diagnosis of 344 women diagnosed with ovarian cancer between 01/06/2002 and 31/05/2008. Effects of possible inaccuracies in dating of diagnosis on the frequencies and timing of the most commonly reported symptoms were investigated using four increasingly inclusive definitions of first diagnosis/suspicion: 1. "Definite diagnosis" 2. "Ambiguous diagnosis" 3. "First treatment or complication suggesting pre-existing diagnosis", 4 "First relevant test or referral".

Results

The most commonly coded symptoms before a definite diagnosis of ovarian cancer, were abdominal pain (41%), urogenital problems(25%), abdominal distension (24%), constipation/change in bowel habits (23%) with 70% of cases reporting at least one of these. The median time between first reporting each of these symptoms and diagnosis was 13, 21, 9.5 and 8.5 weeks respectively. 19% had a code for definitions 2 or 3 prior to definite diagnosis and 73% a code for 4. However, the proportion with symptoms and the delays were similar for all four definitions except 4, where the median delay was 8, 8, 3, 10 and 0 weeks respectively.

Conclusion

Symptoms recorded in the General Practice Research Database are similar to those reported in the literature, although their frequency is lower than in studies based on self-report. Generalisable strategies for exploring the impact of recording practice on date of diagnosis in electronic patient records are recommended, and studies which date diagnoses in GP records need to present sensitivity analyses based on investigation, referral and diagnosis data. Free text information may be essential in obtaining accurate estimates of incidence, and for accurate dating of diagnoses.

Identifying patients with a cancer diagnosis using general practice medical records and Cancer Registry data

BACKGROUND

The medical records of patients with cancer need to accurately record diagnoses for professionals to provide quality care. Aims. (i) To develop a methodology which identifies medical records of patients with a cancer diagnosis. (ii) To describe the effectiveness of search strategies to identify all patients in primary care with a cancer diagnosis compared with a diagnosis identified by a Cancer Registry.

METHODS

The design of the study was a retrospective analysis of primary care medical records. Five general practices were recruited in the UK. The completeness and correctness of searches were measured and compared both within the practices and compared with a diagnosis identified by a Cancer Registry.

RESULTS

One in five of all primary care patients with cancer was not identified when a search for all patients with cancer was conducted using electronic codes for malignancy. One in five patient records with an electronic code for a malignancy that was confirmed by registration with the Cancer Registry actually lacked the necessary documentation to verify the cancer type, date of diagnosis or any other aspect of the malignant condition. Overall, electronic codes for cancer in these medical records have a poor level of completeness (29.4%) and correctness (65.6%) when compared with the Cancer Registry.

CONCLUSIONS

The electronic codes in five general practices were not able to identify all patients on the practice lists with a cancer diagnosis. Practices will only be able to comply with guidelines and meet quality targets if they can identify all of their current patients with a cancer diagnosis and will require information from a Cancer Registry in order to do this.

Primary health care and England: the coming of age of Alma Ata?

The Alma Ata Declaration is now 28 years old. This article uses its framework to assess the changes that have occurred in recent years in the English health system. It summarises the health reform changes that have occurred internationally and those in the English health system in two eras, pre- and post-1997 - when the Labour Party came to power. It concludes that linked forces of managerialism and consumerism have had an impact on the health system which has undergone a number of structural changes in recent years. It suggests that the original Alma Ata focus on equity is being modified by the concept of choice. The tensions between central priorities, often reflected in targets, and local accountability and needs are explored. There appears to be a greater interest in seeking genuine health (rather than solely health care) change, with attendant public health and partnership policies, however the gap between policy and practice still needs to be bridged, and questions as to the appropriate locus and leadership for health promotion activities addressed. However there have been numerous institutional changes which carry the danger of distracting from the purpose of achieving health change, and which continue to raise questions as to the appropriateness of a market model for health. Finally the paper argues that the PHC framework of Alma Ata remains a useful framework for assessing health systems, but needs to be tailored to, and prioritised within, a political dynamic.