1
|
Coles CE, Earl H, Anderson BO, Barrios CH, Bienz M, Bliss JM, Cameron DA, Cardoso F, Cui W, Francis PA, Jagsi R, Knaul FM, McIntosh SA, Phillips KA, Radbruch L, Thompson MK, André F, Abraham JE, Bhattacharya IS, Franzoi MA, Drewett L, Fulton A, Kazmi F, Inbah Rajah D, Mutebi M, Ng D, Ng S, Olopade OI, Rosa WE, Rubasingham J, Spence D, Stobart H, Vargas Enciso V, Vaz-Luis I, Villarreal-Garza C. The Lancet Breast Cancer Commission. Lancet 2024; 403:1895-1950. [PMID: 38636533 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(24)00747-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2023] [Revised: 12/18/2023] [Accepted: 04/09/2024] [Indexed: 04/20/2024]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Helena Earl
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Benjamin O Anderson
- Global Breast Cancer Initiative, World Health Organisation and Departments of Surgery and Global Health Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Carlos H Barrios
- Oncology Research Center, Hospital São Lucas, Porto Alegre, Brazil
| | - Maya Bienz
- Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust, London, UK; Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - David A Cameron
- Institute of Genetics and Cancer and Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Fatima Cardoso
- Breast Unit, Champalimaud Clinical Center/Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Wanda Cui
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Prudence A Francis
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Reshma Jagsi
- Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Felicia Marie Knaul
- Institute for Advanced Study of the Americas, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA; Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA; Tómatelo a Pecho, Mexico City, Mexico
| | - Stuart A McIntosh
- School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Kelly-Anne Phillips
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Lukas Radbruch
- Department of Palliative Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | | | | | - Jean E Abraham
- Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | | | | | - Lynsey Drewett
- Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, UK
| | | | - Farasat Kazmi
- Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, UK
| | | | | | - Dianna Ng
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, NY, USA
| | - Szeyi Ng
- The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | | | - William E Rosa
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, NY, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Cynthia Villarreal-Garza
- Breast Cancer Center, Hospital Zambrano Hellion TecSalud, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Monterrey, Mexico
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Greenwood-Lee J, Jewett L, Woodhouse L, Marshall DA. A categorisation of problems and solutions to improve patient referrals from primary to specialty care. BMC Health Serv Res 2018; 18:986. [PMID: 30572898 PMCID: PMC6302393 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3745-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/23/2018] [Accepted: 11/21/2018] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Improving access to specialty care has been identified as a critical issue in the delivery of health services, especially given an increasing burden of chronic disease. Identifying and addressing problems that impact access to specialty care for patients referred to speciality care for non-emergent procedures and how these deficiencies can be managed via health system delivery interventions is important to improve care for patients with chronic conditions. However, the primary-specialty care interface is complex and may be impacted by a variety of potential health services delivery deficiencies; with an equal range of interventions developed to correct them. Consequently, the literature is also diverse and difficult to navigate. We present a narrative review to identify existing literature, and provide a conceptual map that categorizes problems at the primary-specialty care interface with linkages to corresponding interventions aimed at ensuring that patient transitions across the primary-specialty care interface are necessary, appropriate, timely and well communicated. METHODS We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from January 1, 2005 until Dec 31, 2014, grey literature and reference lists to identify articles that report on interventions implemented to improve the primary-specialty care interface. Selected articles were categorized to describe: 1) the intervention context, including the deficiency addressed, and the objective of the intervention 2) intervention activities, and 3) intervention outcomes. RESULTS We identified 106 articles, producing four categories of health services delivery deficiencies based in: 1) clinical decision making; 2) information management; 3) the system level management of patient flows between primary and secondary care; and 4) quality-of-care monitoring. Interventions were divided into seven categories and fourteen sub-categories based on the deficiencies addressed and the intervention strategies used. Potential synergies and trade-offs among interventions are discussed. Little evidence exists regarding the synergistic and antagonistic interactions of alternative intervention strategies. CONCLUSION The categorization acts as an aid in identifying why the primary-specialty care interface may be failing and which interventions may produce improvements. Overlap and interconnectedness between interventions creates potential synergies and conflicts among co-implemented interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James Greenwood-Lee
- Centre for Science, Athabasca University, 6th Floor, 345 6 Avenue SE, Calgary, Alberta, T2G 4V1, Canada
| | - Lauren Jewett
- Geography & Planning, University of Toronto, Sidney Smith Hall, Rm 594, 100 St George St., Toronto, Ontario, M5S 3G3, Canada
| | - Linda Woodhouse
- Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, 3-10 Corbett Hall, 8205 114 Street, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2G4, Canada
| | - Deborah A Marshall
- Canada Research Chair, Health Services and Systems Research, Arthur J.E. Child Chair in Rheumatology Outcomes Research, Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
- 3C56 Health Research Innovation Centre (HRIC), 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Blank L, Baxter S, Woods HB, Goyder E, Lee A, Payne N, Rimmer M. What is the evidence on interventions to manage referral from primary to specialist non-emergency care? A systematic review and logic model synthesis. HEALTH SERVICES AND DELIVERY RESEARCH 2015. [DOI: 10.3310/hsdr03240] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Abstract
BackgroundDemand management describes any method used to monitor, direct or regulate patient referrals. Several strategies have been developed to manage the referral of patients to secondary care, with interventions targeting primary care, specialist services, or infrastructure.ObjectiveThis research aimed to conduct an inclusive systematic review and logic model synthesis in order to better understand factors impacting on the effectiveness of interventions targeting referral between primary and secondary medical health care.DesignThe approach combined systematic review with logic modelling synthesis techniques to develop an evidence-based framework of factors influencing the pathway between interventions and system-wide changes.SettingPrimary health care.Main outcome measuresReferral from primary to secondary care.Review methodsSystematic searches were undertaken to identify recent, relevant studies. Quality of individual studies was appraised, with consideration of overall strength of evidence. A narrative synthesis and logic model summary of the data was completed.ResultsFrom a database of 8327 unique papers, 290 were included in the review. The intervention studies were grouped into four categories of education interventions (n = 50); process change interventions (n = 49); system change interventions (n = 38); and patient-focused interventions (n = 3). Effectiveness was assessed variously in these papers; however, there was a gap regarding the mechanisms whereby these interventions lead to demand management impacts. The findings suggest that, although individual-level interventions may be popular, the stronger evidence relates only to peer-review and feedback interventions. Process change interventions appeared to be more effective when the change resulted in the specialist being provided with more or better quality information about the patient. System changes including the community provision of specialist services by general practitioners, outreach provision by specialists and the return of inappropriate referrals appeared to have evidence of effect. The pathway whereby interventions might lead to service-wide impact was complex, with multiple factors potentially acting as barriers or facilitators to the change process. Factors related, first, to the doctor (including knowledge, attitudes and beliefs, and previous experiences of a service), second, to the patient (including condition and social factors) and, third, to the influence of the doctor–patient relationship. We also identified a number of potentially influential factors at a local level, such as perceived waiting times and the availability of a specialist. These elements are key factors in the pathway between an intervention and intended demand management outcomes influencing both applicability and effectiveness.ConclusionsThe findings highlight the complexity of the referral process and multiple elements that will impact on intervention outcomes and applicability to a local area. Any interventions seeking to change referral practice need to address factors relating to the individual practitioner, the patient and also the situation in which the referral is taking place. These conclusions apply especially to referral management in a UK context where this whole range of factors/issues lies well within the remit of the NHS. This work highlights that intermediate outcomes are important in the referral pathway. It is recommended that researchers include measure of these intermediate outcomes in their evaluation of intervention effectiveness in order to determine where blocks to or facilitators of system-wide impact may be occurring.Study registrationThe study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013004037.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lindsay Blank
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Susan Baxter
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Helen Buckley Woods
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Elizabeth Goyder
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Andrew Lee
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Nick Payne
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Melanie Rimmer
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Blank L, Baxter S, Woods HB, Goyder E, Lee A, Payne N, Rimmer M. Referral interventions from primary to specialist care: a systematic review of international evidence. Br J Gen Pract 2014; 64:e765-74. [PMID: 25452541 PMCID: PMC4240149 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp14x682837] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2014] [Accepted: 06/11/2014] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Demand management defines any method used to monitor, direct, or regulate patient referrals. Strategies have been developed to manage the referral of patients to secondary care, with interventions that target primary care, specialist services, or infrastructure. AIM To review the international evidence on interventions to manage referral from primary to specialist care. DESIGN AND SETTING Systematic review. METHOD Iterative, systematic searches of published and unpublished sources public health, health management, management, and grey literature databases from health care and other industries were undertaken to identify recent, relevant studies. A narrative synthesis of the data was completed to structure the evidence into groups of similar interventions. RESULTS The searches generated 8327 unique results, of which 140 studies were included. Interventions were grouped into four intervention categories: GP education (n = 50); process change (n = 49); system change (n = 38); and patient-focused (n = 3). It is clear that there is no 'magic bullet' to managing demand for secondary care services: although some groups of interventions may have greater potential for development, given the existing evidence that they can be effective in specific contexts. CONCLUSIONS To tackle demand management of primary care services, the focus cannot be on primary care alone; a whole-systems approach is needed because the introduction of interventions in primary care is often just the starting point of the referral process. In addition, more research is needed to develop and evaluate interventions that acknowledge the role of the patient in the referral decision.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lindsay Blank
- School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield
| | - Susan Baxter
- School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield
| | | | - Elizabeth Goyder
- School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield
| | - Andrew Lee
- School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield
| | - Nick Payne
- School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield
| | - Melanie Rimmer
- School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Mistry SG, Barnes N, Ooi J. Will adherence to new guidance lead to missed cancer diagnoses? Evaluation of limiting symptomatic mammograms to over forties. Breast J 2013; 19:142-8. [PMID: 23316749 DOI: 10.1111/tbj.12074] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Within the United Kingdom, a recent change in "Best Practice Guidance" has suggested that mammograms for symptomatic breast patients, with a clinically benign examination, should be limited to those over 40 years . This has led to anxiety over missing cancer diagnoses in the 35-39 year-old age group. This study aimed to assess the impact of the new guidance upon a NHS Breast unit with a particular focus on safety. Two cancer data bases (BASO and SOMERSET) were used to identify thirty-three patients aged 35-39 years diagnosed with breast cancer between January 2007 and June 2011. Case notes were retrieved and retrospectively analyzed for trends during clinical (P1-P5) and radiological assessment (using Royal College Radiologists Breast Group classification-M1-5, U1-5). Sensitivity and false-negative rates for each modality were calculated. Sensitivities of clinical examination, mammography, and ultrasound for detecting malignancy were 72.7%, 78.8%, and 93.9%, respectively. Within the clinically benign group (P1 and P2), mammography and ultrasound showed sensitivities of detecting malignancy of 55.5% and 88.9%, respectively, with three extra cancers being identified by ultrasound when mammography was graded less than M3 (indeterminate lesion-requiring biopsy). Importantly, no cancers would have been missed if the new guidance had been adhered to. This study has shown that mammography has no additional diagnostic benefit as first-line imaging in symptomatic breast patients aged 35-39 years. It has confirmed that implementation of the new Best Practice Guidance is safe, when used in the setting of triple assessment, to ensure cancer diagnoses are not missed.
Collapse
|