The straight to test endoscopy service for suspected colorectal cancer: meeting national targets but are we meeting our patients' expectations?

A colorectal straight-to-test cancer pathway with general-practitioner-guided triage improves attainment of the 28-day diagnosis target and increases outpatient clinic capacity

AIM

This study investigates whether a straight-to-test (STT) colorectal cancer pathway improves attainment of the National Health Service (NHS) England 28-day Faster Diagnosis Standard and the effect of the pathway on reducing face-to-face outpatient clinic appointments. Patient satisfaction and the safety of a novel general practitioner (GP) led patient triage system regarding suitability for colonoscopy are also evaluated.

METHODS

This is an observational study of all patients managed via an STT colorectal cancer pathway between 1 September 2019 and 19 March 2020. Comparison is made with all patients referred on the suspected colorectal cancer pathway prior to implementation of the STT pathway from 1 January 2019 to 30 July 2019. Patient satisfaction with the STT pathway was assessed with a telephone-based questionnaire.

RESULTS

Attainment of the 28-day diagnosis target for all suspected colorectal cancer referrals improved following the establishment of the STT pathway (88% vs. 82%, P < 0.0001). From a potential total of 548 outpatient colorectal clinic appointments for patients on the STT pathway, 504 (92%) were avoided. In those eligible for the STT pathway, GP assessment of patients suitable for colonoscopy agreed with that of the colorectal department in 93% of cases. Of the 50 patients who undertook the satisfaction survey, 86% were satisfied or very satisfied with the pathway. No patient suffered adverse events as a result of their STT investigations.

CONCLUSION

An STT pathway for suspected colorectal cancer referrals with novel GP-led patient triage safely streamlines patients through the suspected colorectal cancer diagnostic pathway and significantly reduces requirement for face-to-face outpatient clinic attendance. This is achieved with high patient satisfaction.

Removing hospital-based triage from suspected colorectal cancer pathways: the impact and learning from a primary care-led electronic straight-to-test pathway

BACKGROUND

The 2-week wait referral pathway for suspected colorectal cancer was introduced in England to improve time from referral from a general practitioner (GP) to diagnosis and treatment. Patients are required to be seen by a hospital clinician within 2 weeks if their symptoms meet the criteria set by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and to start cancer treatment within 62 days. To achieve this, many hospitals have introduced a straight-to-test (STT) strategy requiring hospital-based triage of referrals. We describe the impact and learning from a new pathway which has removed triage and moved the process of requesting tests from hospital to GPs in primary care.

METHOD

An electronic STT pathway was introduced allowing GPs to book tests supported by a decision aid based on NICE guidance eliminating the need for a standard referral form or triage process. The hospital identified referrals as being on a cancer pathway and dealt with all ongoing management. Routinely collected cancer data were used to identify time to cancer diagnosis compared with national data RESULTS: 11357 patients were referred via the new pathway over 3 years. Time from referral to diagnosis reduced from 39 to 21 days and led to a dramatic improvement in patients starting treatment within 62 days. Challenges included adapting to a change in referral criteria and developing a robust hospital system to monitor the pathway.

CONCLUSION

We have changed the way patients with suspected colorectal cancer are managed within the National Health Service by giving GPs the ability to order tests electronically within a monitored cancer pathway halving time from referral to diagnosis.

Direct access cancer testing in primary care: a systematic review of use and clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Direct access (DA) testing allows GPs to refer patients for investigation without consulting a specialist. The aim is to reduce waiting time for investigations and unnecessary appointments, enabling treatment to begin without delay.

AIM

To establish the proportion of patients diagnosed with cancer and other diseases through DA testing, time to diagnosis, and suitability of DA investigations.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic review assessing the effectiveness of GP DA testing in adults.

METHOD

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched. Where possible, study data were pooled and analysed quantitatively. Where this was not possible, the data are presented narratively.

RESULTS

The authors identified 60 papers that met pre-specified inclusion criteria. Most studies were carried out in the UK and were judged to be of poor quality. The authors found no significant difference in the pooled cancer conversion rate between GP DA referrals and patients who first consulted a specialist for any test, except gastroscopy. There were also no significant differences in the proportions of patients receiving any non-cancer diagnosis. Referrals for testing were deemed appropriate in 66.4% of those coming from GPs, and in 80.9% of those from consultants; this difference was not significant. The time from referral to testing was significantly shorter for patients referred for DA tests. Patient and GP satisfaction with DA testing was consistently high.

CONCLUSION

GP DA testing performs as well as, and on some measures better than, consultant triaged testing on measures of disease detection, appropriateness of referrals, interval from referral to testing, and patient and GP satisfaction.

Straight-to-test colonoscopy for 2-week-wait referrals improves time to diagnosis of colorectal cancer and is feasible in a high-volume unit

AIM

We have introduced 'straight-to-test' (STT) colonoscopy as part of our 2-week-wait (2WW) pathway to address increasing numbers of urgent referrals for colorectal cancer (CRC) within the National Health Service. In this study we evaluated the ability of this initiative to shorten the time to diagnosis of CRC.

METHOD

We amended our 2WW referral form to include performance status and comorbidities. General practitioners were asked to provide data on estimated glomerular filtration rate and full blood count/ferritin. Our 2WW referrals were screened by a colorectal consultant and a nurse specialist. Those deemed unsuitable for STT were offered outpatient assessment (OPA).

RESULTS

Of 553 2WW referrals screened, 352 were considered suitable, 65 of whom failed a telephone assessment or were uncontactable, and accordingly 287 were offered the STT pathway. The STT group was significantly younger than the OPA group (median 65.9 years vs 78.7 years; P < 0.0001). STT colonoscopy significantly reduced the time to first test (13 days vs 22 days; P < 0.0001) and tissue diagnosis from the referral date (17 days vs 24.5 days; P < 0.0001). Thirty-seven (6.8%) CRCs were detected. Proportionately fewer patients in the STT pathway were managed with 'best supportive care only' compared with patients attending OPA (one of 15 vs six of 22, respectively). STT colonoscopy obviated the need for clinic attendance before testing in 287 patients, representing a potential net cost benefit of at least £48 500 in 4 months.

CONCLUSION

STT colonoscopy was safe and effective for selecting out a group of symptomatic patients who could proceed straight to endoscopic examination and receive a diagnosis more rapidly.

Trends in urgent referrals for suspected colorectal cancer: an increase in quantity, but not in quality

INTRODUCTION An understanding of the volume of incoming referrals to a colorectal cancer (CRC) service is essential for adequate delivery of service. We hypothesised that the number of 2-week-wait (2WW) referrals has increased over recent years, with a concomitant increase in demand for endoscopic and imaging investigations. METHODS A retrospective review of all referrals from primary care with suspected malignancy to Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS Trust (BHRNHST, London, UK) from 2009 to 2014 was undertaken. Annual numbers of CRC diagnoses, colonoscopies and CT scans among these patients were reviewed. Linear regression models were used to determine the significance of observed trends. RESULTS Annual number of 2WW referrals for all cancers increased steadily from 14,031 to 19,983 during the study period (p<0.01). Referrals for suspected CRC increased from 1,706 to 2,874 (p=0.02). Number of colonoscopies and CT scans carried out in 2WW patients also increased significantly. Proportion of patients referred as a 2WW diagnosed with CRC decreased from 7.9% in 2009 to 4.7% in 2014 (p=0.02). DISCUSSION Number of referrals for suspected cancer from primary care to BHRNHST is increasing steadily, which has implications for service provision. Prevalence of cancer diagnoses from these referrals is decreasing. CONCLUSIONS There has been a sustained and substantial increase in the number of urgent referrals for suspected CRC at BHRNHST over recent years, without an increase in the number of resulting cancer diagnoses.

Prevalence of pelvic floor symptoms in female patients attending the two-week wait clinic with suspected colorectal cancer

Introduction The aim of this study was to establish the prevalence of pelvic floor symptoms in women referred to a colorectal two-week wait (2WW) clinic with suspected colorectal cancer. Methods A questionnaire assessing faecal incontinence (FI) (Wexner score) and obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) (Renzi score) was offered to 98 consecutive female patients attending a colorectal 2WW clinic at a single trust. Results Overall, 56 (57%) of the 98 patients had significant ODS and/or FI (scores >9/20), 33 (34%) had ODS and 40 (41%) had FI. Seventeen patients (17%) had both ODS and FI. Analysis of the 63 patients referred with a change in bowel habit (CIBH) showed 40 (63%) to be Renzi and/or Wexner positive compared with 16 (46%) of the 35 patients who presented without CIBH (p=0.095, Fisher's exact test). Further analysis showed that 31 (78%) of the 40 patients with FI presented with CIBH compared with 32 (55%) of the 58 without FI (p=0.032). In terms of ODS, 23 (70%) of the 33 patients with ODS presented with CIBH compared with 40 (62%) of the 65 without ODS (p=0.506). Conclusions Over half of the female patients attending our colorectal 2WW clinic had significant pelvic floor dysfunction (FI/ODS), which may account for their symptoms (especially in the CIBH referral category). While it is important for malignancy to be excluded, many patients may benefit from investigation and management of their pelvic floor dysfunction as the cause for their presenting symptoms.

Over-reassurance and undersupport after a 'false alarm': a systematic review of the impact on subsequent cancer symptom attribution and help seeking

OBJECTIVES

This literature review examined research into the impact of a previous 'all-clear' or non-cancer diagnosis following symptomatic presentation ('false alarm') on symptom attribution and delays in help seeking for subsequent possible cancer symptoms.

DESIGN AND SETTING

The comprehensive literature review included original research based on quantitative, qualitative and mixed data collection methods. We used a combination of search strategies, including in-depth searches of electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, PsychInfo), searching key authors and articles listed as 'related' in PubMed, and reference lists. We performed a narrative synthesis of key themes shared across studies.

PARTICIPANTS

The review included studies published after 1990 and before February 2014 reporting information on adult patients having experienced a false alarm following symptomatic presentation. We excluded false alarms in the context of screening.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

We evaluated the effect of a 'false alarm' on symptom attribution and help seeking for new or recurrent possible cancer symptoms.

RESULTS

Overall, 1442 papers were screened and 121 retrieved for full-text evaluation. Among them, 19 reported on false alarms and subsequent symptom attribution or help seeking. They used qualitative (n=14), quantitative (n=3) and mixed methods (n=2). Breast (n=7), gynaecological (n=3), colorectal (n=2), testicular (n=2), and head and neck cancers (n=2) were the most studied. Two broad themes emerged underlying delays in help seeking: (1) over-reassurance from the previous 'all-clear' diagnosis leading to subsequent symptoms being interpreted as benign, and (2) unsupportive healthcare experiences in which symptoms were dismissed, leaving patients concerned about appearing hypochondriacal or uncertain about the appropriate next actions. The evidence suggested that the effect of a false alarm can persist for months and even years.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, over-reassurance and undersupport of patients after a false alarm can undermine help seeking in the case of new or recurrent potential cancer symptoms, highlighting the need for appropriate patient information when investigations rule out cancer.