1
|
Koo MM, Mounce LTA, Rafiq M, Callister MEJ, Singh H, Abel GA, Lyratzopoulos G. Guideline concordance for timely chest imaging after new presentations of dyspnoea or haemoptysis in primary care: a retrospective cohort study. Thorax 2024; 79:236-244. [PMID: 37620048 DOI: 10.1136/thorax-2022-219509] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2022] [Accepted: 07/08/2023] [Indexed: 08/26/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Guidelines recommend urgent chest X-ray for newly presenting dyspnoea or haemoptysis but there is little evidence about their implementation. METHODS We analysed linked primary care and hospital imaging data for patients aged 30+ years newly presenting with dyspnoea or haemoptysis in primary care during April 2012 to March 2017. We examined guideline-concordant management, defined as General Practitioner-ordered chest X-ray/CT carried out within 2 weeks of symptomatic presentation, and variation by sociodemographic characteristic and relevant medical history using logistic regression. Additionally, among patients diagnosed with cancer we described time to diagnosis, diagnostic route and stage at diagnosis by guideline-concordant status. RESULTS In total, 22 560/162 161 (13.9%) patients with dyspnoea and 4022/8120 (49.5%) patients with haemoptysis received guideline-concordant imaging within the recommended 2-week period. Patients with recent chest imaging pre-presentation were much less likely to receive imaging (adjusted OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.14-0.18 for dyspnoea, and adjusted OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.06-0.11 for haemoptysis). History of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease/asthma was also associated with lower odds of guideline concordance (dyspnoea: OR 0.234, 95% CI 0.225-0.242 and haemoptysis: 0.88, 0.79-0.97). Guideline-concordant imaging was lower among dyspnoea presenters with prior heart failure; current or ex-smokers; and those in more socioeconomically disadvantaged groups.The likelihood of lung cancer diagnosis within 12 months was greater among the guideline-concordant imaging group (dyspnoea: 1.1% vs 0.6%; haemoptysis: 3.5% vs 2.7%). CONCLUSION The likelihood of receiving urgent imaging concords with the risk of subsequent cancer diagnosis. Nevertheless, large proportions of dyspnoea and haemoptysis presenters do not receive prompt chest imaging despite being eligible, indicating opportunities for earlier lung cancer diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Minjoung Monica Koo
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Dept. of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology & Health Care (IEHC), UCL, London, UK
| | - Luke T A Mounce
- Exeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care (APEx), University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Meena Rafiq
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Dept. of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology & Health Care (IEHC), UCL, London, UK
| | | | - Hardeep Singh
- Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness, and Safety (IQuESt), Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
- Health Services Research Section, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Gary A Abel
- Exeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care (APEx), University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Dept. of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology & Health Care (IEHC), UCL, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Zakkak N, Barclay ME, Swann R, McPhail S, Rubin G, Abel GA, Lyratzopoulos G. The presenting symptom signatures of incident cancer: evidence from the English 2018 National Cancer Diagnosis Audit. Br J Cancer 2024; 130:297-307. [PMID: 38057397 PMCID: PMC10803766 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-023-02507-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2023] [Revised: 10/27/2023] [Accepted: 11/13/2023] [Indexed: 12/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Understanding relationships between presenting symptoms and subsequently diagnosed cancers can inform symptom awareness campaigns and investigation strategies. METHODS We used English National Cancer Diagnosis Audit 2018 data for 55,122 newly diagnosed patients, and examined the relative frequency of presenting symptoms by cancer site, and of cancer sites by presenting symptom. RESULTS Among 38 cancer sites (16 cancer groups), three classes were apparent: cancers with a dominant single presenting symptom (e.g. melanoma); cancers with diverse presenting symptoms (e.g. pancreatic); and cancers that are often asymptomatically detected (e.g. chronic lymphocytic leukaemia). Among 83 symptoms (13 symptom groups), two classes were apparent: symptoms chiefly relating to cancers of the same body system (e.g. certain respiratory symptoms mostly relating to respiratory cancers); and symptoms with a diverse cancer site case-mix (e.g. fatigue). The cancer site case-mix of certain symptoms varied by sex. CONCLUSION We detailed associations between presenting symptoms and cancer sites in a large, representative population-based sample of cancer patients. The findings can guide choice of symptoms for inclusion in awareness campaigns, and diagnostic investigation strategies post-presentation when cancer is suspected. They can inform the updating of clinical practice recommendations for specialist referral encompassing a broader range of cancer sites per symptom.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N Zakkak
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, UK.
| | - M E Barclay
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, UK
| | - R Swann
- National Disease Registration Service, NHS England, London, UK
- Cancer Intelligence, Cancer Research UK, London, UK
| | - S McPhail
- National Disease Registration Service, NHS England, London, UK
| | - G Rubin
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - G A Abel
- Medical School, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, London, UK
| | - G Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Swann R, McPhail S, Abel GA, Witt J, Wills L, Hiom S, Lyratzopoulos G, Rubin G. National Cancer Diagnosis Audits for England 2018 versus 2014: a comparative analysis. Br J Gen Pract 2023; 73:e566-e574. [PMID: 37253630 PMCID: PMC10242853 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp.2022.0268] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2022] [Revised: 08/28/2022] [Accepted: 01/18/2023] [Indexed: 03/17/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Timely diagnosis of cancer in patients who present with symptoms in primary care is a quality-improvement priority. AIM To examine possible changes to aspects of the diagnostic process, and its timeliness, before and after publication of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's (2015) guidance on the referral of suspected cancer in primary care. DESIGN AND SETTING Comparison of findings from population-based clinical audits of cancer diagnosis in general practices in England for patients diagnosed in 2018 or 2014. METHOD GPs in 1878 (2018) and 439 (2014) practices collected primary care information on the diagnostic pathway of cancer patients. Key measures including patient characteristics, place of presentation, number of pre-referral consultations, use of primary care investigations, and referral type were compared between the two audits by descriptive analysis and regression models. RESULTS Among 64 489 (2018) and 17 042 (2014) records of a new cancer diagnosis, the percentage of patients with same-day referral (denoted by a primary care interval of 0 days) was higher in 2018 (42.7% versus 37.7%) than in 2014, with similar improvements in median diagnostic interval (36 days versus 40 days). Compared with 2014, in 2018: fewer patients had ≥3 pre-referral consultations (18.8% versus 26.2%); use of primary care investigations increased (47.9% versus 45.4%); urgent cancer referrals increased (54.8% versus 51.8%); emergency referrals decreased (13.4% versus 16.5%); and recorded use of safety netting decreased (40.0% versus 44.4%). CONCLUSION In the 5-year period, including the year when national guidelines were updated (that is, 2015), there were substantial improvements to the diagnostic process of patients who present to general practice in England with symptoms of a subsequently diagnosed cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Sean McPhail
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, NHS Digital, Leeds
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), University of Exeter, Exeter
| | - Jana Witt
- Cystic Fibrosis Trust, London; former NCDA programme manager, Cancer Research UK, London
| | | | - Sara Hiom
- NHS Implementation & External Affairs; former director, Cancer Intelligence, Early Diagnosis and Clinical Engagement, Cancer Research UK, London
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Cranfield BM, Abel GA, Swann R, Moore SF, McPhail S, Rubin GP, Lyratzopoulos G. Pre-Referral Primary Care Blood Tests and Symptom Presentation before Cancer Diagnosis: National Cancer Diagnosis Audit Data. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:3587. [PMID: 37509248 PMCID: PMC10377509 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15143587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2023] [Accepted: 06/29/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Blood tests can support the diagnostic process in primary care. Understanding how symptomatic presentations are associated with blood test use in patients subsequently diagnosed with cancer can help to benchmark current practices and guide interventions. METHODS English National Cancer Diagnosis Audit data on 39,751 patients with incident cancer in 2018 were analysed. The frequency of four generic (full blood count, urea and electrolytes, liver function tests, and inflammatory markers) and five organ-specific (cancer biomarkers (PSA or CA125), serum protein electrophoresis, ferritin, bone profile, and amylase) blood tests was described for a total of 83 presenting symptoms. The adjusted analysis explored variation in blood test use by the symptom-positive predictive value (PPV) group. RESULTS There was a large variation in generic blood test use by presenting symptoms, being higher in patients subsequently diagnosed with cancer who presented with nonspecific symptoms (e.g., fatigue 81% or loss of appetite 79%), and lower in those who presented with alarm symptoms (e.g., breast lump 3% or skin lesion 1%). Serum protein electrophoresis (reflecting suspicion of multiple myeloma) was most frequently used in cancer patients who presented with back pain (18%), and amylase measurement (reflecting suspicion of pancreatic cancer) was used in those who presented with upper abdominal pain (14%). Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) use was greatest in men with cancer who presented with lower urinary tract symptoms (88%), and CA125 in women with cancer who presented with abdominal distention (53%). Symptoms with PPV values between 2.00-2.99% were associated with greater test use (64%) compared with 52% and 51% in symptoms with PPVs in the 0.01-0.99 or 1.00-1.99% range and compared with 42% and 31% in symptoms with PPVs in either the 3.00-4.99 or ≥5% range (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Generic blood test use reflects the PPV of presenting symptoms, and the use of organ-specific tests is greater in patients with symptomatic presentations with known associations with certain cancer sites. There are opportunities for greater blood test use in patients presenting with symptoms that do not meet referral thresholds (i.e., <3% PPV for cancer) where information gain to support referral decisions is likely greatest. The findings benchmark blood test use in cancer patients, highlighting opportunities for increasing use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ben M Cranfield
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter EX1 2HZ, UK
| | - Ruth Swann
- National Disease Registration Service, NHS England, Leeds LS1 4AP, UK
- Cancer Research UK, London E20 1JQ, UK
| | - Sarah F Moore
- University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter EX1 2HZ, UK
| | - Sean McPhail
- National Disease Registration Service, NHS England, Leeds LS1 4AP, UK
| | - Greg P Rubin
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 4LP, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK
- National Disease Registration Service, NHS England, Leeds LS1 4AP, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Treadgold BM, Campbell JL, Abel GA, Sussex J, Froud R, Hocking L, Pitchforth E. Investigating Clinical Excellence and Impact Awards (INCEA): a qualitative study into how current assessors and other key stakeholders define and score excellence. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e068602. [PMID: 37263695 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068602] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/03/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The National Clinical Excellence Awards (NCEAs) in England and Wales were designed, as a form of performance-related pay, to reward high-performing senior doctors and dentists. To inform future scoring of applications and subsequent schemes, we sought to understand how current assessors and other stakeholders would define excellence, differentiate between levels of excellence and ensure unbiased definitions and scoring. DESIGN Semistructured qualitative interview study. PARTICIPANTS 25 key informants were identified from Advisory Committee on Clinical Excellence Awards subcommittees, and relevant professional organisations in England and Wales. Informants were purposively sampled to achieve variety in gender and ethnicity. FINDINGS Participants reported that NCEAs had a role in incentivising doctors to strive for excellence. They were consistent in identifying 'clinical excellence' as involving making an exceptional difference to patients and the National Health Service, and in going over and above the expectations associated with the doctor's job plan. Informants who were assessors reported: encountering challenges with the current scoring scheme when seeking to ensure a fair assessment; recognising tendencies to score more or less leniently; and the potential for conscious or unconscious bias in assessments. Particular groups of doctors, including women, doctors in some specialties and settings, doctors from minority ethnic groups, and doctors who work less than full time, were described as being less likely to self-nominate, lacking support in making applications or lacking motivation to apply on account of a perceived likelihood of not being successful. Practical suggestions were made for improving support and training for applicants and assessors. CONCLUSIONS Participants in this qualitative study identified specific concerns in respect of the current approaches adopted in applying for and in assessing NCEAs, pointing to the importance of equity of opportunity to apply, the need for regular training for assessors, and to improved support for applicants and potential applicants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bethan M Treadgold
- Primary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - John L Campbell
- Primary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- Primary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | | | | | | | - Emma Pitchforth
- Primary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Hamilton W, Mounce L, Abel GA, Dean SG, Campbell JL, Warren FC, Spencer A, Medina-Lara A, Pitt M, Shephard E, Shakespeare M, Fletcher E, Mercer A, Calitri R. Protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial assessing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Electronic RIsk-assessment for CAncer for patients in general practice (ERICA). BMJ Open 2023; 13:e065232. [PMID: 36940950 PMCID: PMC10030284 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065232] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/23/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The UK has worse cancer outcomes than most comparable countries, with a large contribution attributed to diagnostic delay. Electronic risk assessment tools (eRATs) have been developed to identify primary care patients with a ≥2% risk of cancer using features recorded in the electronic record. METHODS AND ANALYSIS This is a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial in English primary care. Individual general practices will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to intervention (provision of eRATs for six common cancer sites) or to usual care. The primary outcome is cancer stage at diagnosis, dichotomised to stage 1 or 2 (early) or stage 3 or 4 (advanced) for these six cancers, assessed from National Cancer Registry data. Secondary outcomes include stage at diagnosis for a further six cancers without eRATs, use of urgent referral cancer pathways, total practice cancer diagnoses, routes to cancer diagnosis and 30-day and 1-year cancer survival. Economic and process evaluations will be performed along with service delivery modelling. The primary analysis explores the proportion of patients with early-stage cancer at diagnosis. The sample size calculation used an OR of 0.8 for a cancer being diagnosed at an advanced stage in the intervention arm compared with the control arm, equating to an absolute reduction of 4.8% as an incidence-weighted figure across the six cancers. This requires 530 practices overall, with the intervention active from April 2022 for 2 years. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The trial has approval from London City and East Research Ethics Committee, reference number 19/LO/0615; protocol version 5.0, 9 May 2022. It is sponsored by the University of Exeter. Dissemination will be by journal publication, conferences, use of appropriate social media and direct sharing with cancer policymakers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN22560297.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Willie Hamilton
- Primary Care Diagnostics, University of Exeter, EXETER, GB, UK
| | - Luke Mounce
- Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), University of Exeter, Exeter, Essex, UK
| | | | | | - Fiona C Warren
- Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Anne Spencer
- Health Economics, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | | | - Martin Pitt
- University of Exeter: Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, Essex, UK
| | | | | | - Emily Fletcher
- Primary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, Devon, UK
| | - Adrian Mercer
- Primary Care, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Raff Calitri
- Primary Care, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Cranfield BM, Koo MM, Abel GA, Swann R, McPhail S, Rubin GP, Lyratzopoulos G. Primary care blood tests before cancer diagnosis: National Cancer Diagnosis Audit data. Br J Gen Pract 2023; 73:e95-e103. [PMID: 36253112 PMCID: PMC9591015 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp.2022.0265] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2022] [Accepted: 09/07/2022] [Indexed: 01/31/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Blood tests can support the diagnostic process in patients with cancer but how often they are used is unclear. AIM To explore use of common blood tests before cancer diagnosis in primary care. DESIGN AND SETTING English National Cancer Diagnosis Audit data on 39 752 patients with cancer diagnosed in 2018. METHOD Common blood test use (full blood count [FBC], urea and electrolytes [U&E], and liver function tests [LFTs]), variation by patient and symptom group, and associations with the primary care interval and the diagnostic interval were assessed. RESULTS At least one common blood test was used in 41% (n = 16 427/39 752) of patients subsequently diagnosed with cancer. Among tested patients, (n = 16 427), FBC was used in 95% (n = 15 540), U&E in 89% (n = 14 555), and LFTs in 76% (n = 12 414). Blood testing was less common in females (adjusted odds ratio versus males: 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.87 to 0.98) and Black and minority ethnic patients (0.89, 95% CI = 0.82 to 0.97 versus White), and more common in older patients (1.12, 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.18 for ≥70 years versus 50-69 years). Test use varied greatly by cancer site (melanoma 2% [ n = 55/2297]; leukaemia 84% [ n = 552/661]). Fewer patients presenting with alarm symptoms alone were tested (24% [ n = 3341/13 778]) than those with non-alarm symptoms alone (50% [ n = 8223/16 487]). Median primary care interval and diagnostic interval were longer in tested than non-tested patients (primary care interval: 10 versus 0 days; diagnostic interval: 49 versus 32 days, respectively, P<0.001 for both), including among tested patients with alarm symptoms (primary care interval: 4 versus 0 days; diagnostic interval: 41 versus 22 days). CONCLUSION Two-fifths of patients subsequently diagnosed with cancer have primary care blood tests as part of their diagnostic process. Given variable test use, research is needed on the clinical context in which blood tests are ordered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter
| | - Ruth Swann
- National Disease Registration Service, NHS Digital, Leeds, and Cancer Research UK, London
| | - Sean McPhail
- National Disease Registration Service, NHS Digital, Leeds
| | - Greg P Rubin
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Koo MM, Swann R, McPhail S, Abel GA, Renzi C, Rubin GP, Lyratzopoulos G. Morbidity and measures of the diagnostic process in primary care for patients subsequently diagnosed with cancer. Fam Pract 2022; 39:623-632. [PMID: 34849768 PMCID: PMC9295610 DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmab139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is uncertainty regarding how pre-existing conditions (morbidities) may influence the primary care investigation and management of individuals subsequently diagnosed with cancer. METHODS We identified morbidities using information from both primary and secondary care records among 11,716 patients included in the English National Cancer Diagnosis Audit (NCDA) 2014. We examined variation in 5 measures of the diagnostic process (the primary care interval, diagnostic interval, number of pre-referral consultations, use of primary care-led investigations, and referral type) by both primary care- and hospital records-derived measures of morbidity. RESULTS Morbidity prevalence recorded before cancer diagnosis was almost threefold greater using the primary care (75%) vs secondary care-derived measure (28%). After adjustment, there was limited variation in the primary care interval and the number of pre-referral consultations by either definition of morbidity. Patients with more severe morbidities were less likely to have had a primary care-led investigation before cancer diagnosis compared with those without any morbidity (adjusted odds ratio, OR [95% confidence interval]: 0.72 [0.60-0.86] for Charlson score 3+ vs 0; joint P < 0.001). Patients with multiple primary care-recorded conditions or a Charlson score of 3+ were more likely to have diagnostic intervals exceeding 60 days (aOR: 1.26 [1.10-1.45] and 1.19 [>1.00-1.41], respectively), and more likely to receive an emergency referral (aOR: 1.60 [1.26-2.02] and 1.61 [1.26-2.06], respectively). CONCLUSION Among cancer cases with up to 2 morbidities, there was no evidence of differences in diagnostic processes and intervals in primary care but higher morbidity burden was associated with longer time to diagnosis and higher likelihood of emergency referral.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Minjoung M Koo
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
- National Disease Registration Service, NHS Digital, Leeds, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom
| | - Ruth Swann
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
- National Disease Registration Service, NHS Digital, Leeds, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom
- Cancer Research UK, London, United Kingdom
| | - Sean McPhail
- National Disease Registration Service, NHS Digital, Leeds, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom
| | - Gary A Abel
- Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke’s Campus, Exeter, United Kingdom
| | - Cristina Renzi
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Greg P Rubin
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, United Kingdom
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
- National Disease Registration Service, NHS Digital, Leeds, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
White B, Renzi C, Rafiq M, Abel GA, Jensen H, Lyratzopoulos G. Does changing healthcare use signal opportunities for earlier detection of cancer? A review of studies using information from electronic patient records. Cancer Epidemiol 2022; 76:102072. [PMID: 34876377 PMCID: PMC8785122 DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2021.102072] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2021] [Revised: 11/10/2021] [Accepted: 11/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND It has been proposed that changes in healthcare use before cancer diagnosis could signal opportunities for quicker detection, but systematic appreciation of such evidence is lacking. We reviewed studies examining pre-diagnostic changes in healthcare utilisation (e.g. rates of GP or hospital consultations, prescriptions or diagnostic tests) among patients subsequently diagnosed with cancer. METHODS We identified studies through Pubmed searches complemented by expert elicitation. We extracted information on the earliest time point when diagnosis could have been possible for at least some cancers, together with variation in the length of such 'diagnostic windows' by tumour and patient characteristics. RESULTS Across twenty-eight studies, changes in healthcare use were observable at least six months pre-diagnosis for many common cancers, and potentially even earlier for colorectal cancer, multiple myeloma and brain tumours. Early changes were also identified for brain and colon cancer sub-sites. CONCLUSION Changing healthcare utilisation patterns before diagnosis indicate that future improvements in diagnostic technologies or services could help to shorten diagnostic intervals for cancer. There is greatest potential for quicker diagnosis for certain cancer types and patient groups, which can inform priorities for the development of decision support tools.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Becky White
- ECHO (Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care (IEHC)), University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK.
| | - Cristina Renzi
- ECHO (Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care (IEHC)), University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Meena Rafiq
- ECHO (Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care (IEHC)), University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Magdalen Road, Exeter EX1 2LU, UK
| | - Henry Jensen
- Research Unit for General Practice, Bartholins Allé 2, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- ECHO (Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care (IEHC)), University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Gomez‐Cano M, Lyratzopoulos G, Campbell JL, N. Elliott M, A. Abel G. The underlying structure of the English Cancer Patient Experience Survey: Factor analysis to support survey reporting and design. Cancer Med 2022; 11:3-20. [PMID: 34866346 PMCID: PMC8704178 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.4325] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2020] [Revised: 08/27/2021] [Accepted: 08/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The English Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES) is a regularly conducted survey measuring the experience of cancer patients. We studied the survey's underlying structure using factor analysis to identify potential for improvements in reporting or questionnaire design. METHODS Cancer Patient Experience Survey 2015 respondents (n = 71,186, response rate 66%) were split into two random subgroups. Using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) on the first subgroup, we identified the survey's latent structure. EFA was then applied to 12 sets of items. A first ("core") set was formed by questions that applied to all participants. The subsequent sets contained the "core set" plus questions corresponding to specific care pathways/patient groups. We used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the second data subgroup for cross-validation. RESULTS The EFA suggested that five latent factors underlie the survey's core questions. Analysis on the remaining 11 care pathway/patient group items also indicated the same five latent factors, although additional factors were present for questions applicable to patients with an overnight stay or those accessing specialist nursing. The five factors models had an excellent fit (comparative fit index = 0.95, root mean square error of approximation = 0.045 for core set of questions). Items loading on each factor generally corresponded to a specific section or subsection of the questionnaire. CFA findings were concordant with the EFA patterns. CONCLUSION The findings suggest five coherent underlying sub-constructs relating to different aspects of cancer health care. The findings support the construction of evidence-based composite indicators for different domains of experience and provide options for survey re-design.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mayam Gomez‐Cano
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care)University of ExeterExeterUK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) GroupDepartment of Behavioural Science and HealthUniversity College LondonLondonUK
| | - John L. Campbell
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care)University of ExeterExeterUK
| | | | - Gary A. Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care)University of ExeterExeterUK
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Zhou Y, Walter FM, Mounce L, Abel GA, Singh H, Hamilton W, Stewart GD, Lyratzopoulos G. Identifying opportunities for timely diagnosis of bladder and renal cancer via abnormal blood tests: a longitudinal linked data study. Br J Gen Pract 2022; 72:e19-e25. [PMID: 34903517 PMCID: PMC8714503 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp.2021.0282] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2021] [Accepted: 09/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Understanding pre-diagnostic test use could reveal diagnostic windows where more timely evaluation for cancer may be indicated. AIM To examine pre-diagnostic patterns of results of abnormal blood tests in patients with bladder and renal cancer. DESIGN AND SETTING A retrospective cohort study using primary care and cancer registry data on patients with bladder and renal cancer who were diagnosed between April 2012 and December 2015 in England. METHOD The rates of patients with a first abnormal result in the year before cancer diagnosis, for 'generic' (full blood count components, inflammatory markers, and calcium) and 'organ-specific' blood tests (creatinine and liver function test components) that may lead to subsequent detection of incidental cancers, were examined. Poisson regression was used to detect the month during which the cohort's rate of each abnormal test started to increase from baseline. The proportion of patients with a test found in the first half of the diagnostic window was examined, as these 'early' tests might represent opportunities where further evaluation could be initiated. RESULTS Data from 4533 patients with bladder and renal cancer were analysed. The monthly rate of patients with a first abnormal test increased towards the time of cancer diagnosis. Abnormalities of both generic (for example, high inflammatory markers) and organ-specific tests (for example, high creatinine) started to increase from 6-8 months pre-diagnosis, with 25%-40% of these patients having an abnormal test in the 'early half' of the diagnostic window. CONCLUSION Population-level signals of bladder and renal cancer can be observed in abnormalities in commonly performed primary care blood tests up to 8 months before diagnosis, indicating the potential for earlier diagnosis in some patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yin Zhou
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Fiona M Walter
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; professor of primary care cancer research, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University London, London, UK
| | - Luke Mounce
- University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Hardeep Singh
- Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, TX, US; Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, US
| | | | - Grant D Stewart
- Department of Surgery, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Herbert A, Rafiq M, Pham TM, Renzi C, Abel GA, Price S, Hamilton W, Petersen I, Lyratzopoulos G. Predictive values for different cancers and inflammatory bowel disease of 6 common abdominal symptoms among more than 1.9 million primary care patients in the UK: A cohort study. PLoS Med 2021; 18:e1003708. [PMID: 34339405 PMCID: PMC8367005 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003708] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2021] [Revised: 08/16/2021] [Accepted: 06/23/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The diagnostic assessment of abdominal symptoms in primary care presents a challenge. Evidence is needed about the positive predictive values (PPVs) of abdominal symptoms for different cancers and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS AND FINDINGS Using data from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) in the United Kingdom (2000-2017), we estimated the PPVs for diagnosis of (i) cancer (overall and for different cancer sites); (ii) IBD; and (iii) either cancer or IBD in the year post-consultation with each of 6 abdominal symptoms: dysphagia (n = 86,193 patients), abdominal bloating/distension (n = 100,856), change in bowel habit (n = 106,715), rectal bleeding (n = 235,094), dyspepsia (n = 517,326), and abdominal pain (n = 890,490). The median age ranged from 54 (abdominal pain) to 63 years (dysphagia and change in bowel habit); the ratio of women/men ranged from 50%:50% (rectal bleeding) to 73%:27% (abdominal bloating/distension). Across all studied symptoms, the risk of diagnosis of cancer and the risk of diagnosis of IBD were of similar magnitude, particularly in women, and younger men. Estimated PPVs were greatest for change in bowel habit in men (4.64% cancer and 2.82% IBD) and for rectal bleeding in women (2.39% cancer and 2.57% IBD) and lowest for dyspepsia (for cancer: 1.41% men and 1.03% women; for IBD: 0.89% men and 1.00% women). Considering PPVs for specific cancers, change in bowel habit and rectal bleeding had the highest PPVs for colon and rectal cancer; dysphagia for esophageal cancer; and abdominal bloating/distension (in women) for ovarian cancer. The highest PPVs of abdominal pain (either sex) and abdominal bloating/distension (men only) were for non-abdominal cancer sites. For the composite outcome of diagnosis of either cancer or IBD, PPVs of rectal bleeding exceeded the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE)-recommended specialist referral threshold of 3% in all age-sex strata, as did PPVs of abdominal pain, change in bowel habit, and dyspepsia, in those aged 60 years and over. Study limitations include reliance on accuracy and completeness of coding of symptoms and disease outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Based on evidence from more than 1.9 million patients presenting in primary care, the findings provide estimated PPVs that could be used to guide specialist referral decisions, considering the PPVs of common abdominal symptoms for cancer alongside that for IBD and their composite outcome (cancer or IBD), taking into account the variable PPVs of different abdominal symptoms for different cancers sites. Jointly assessing the risk of cancer or IBD can better support decision-making and prompt diagnosis of both conditions, optimising specialist referrals or investigations, particularly in women.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annie Herbert
- MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit at University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
- Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Meena Rafiq
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Tra My Pham
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, United Kingdom
| | - Cristina Renzi
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Gary A. Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom
| | - Sarah Price
- University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom
| | - Willie Hamilton
- University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom
| | - Irene Petersen
- Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Price S, Abel GA, Hamilton W. Guideline interval: A new time interval in the diagnostic pathway for symptomatic cancer. Cancer Epidemiol 2021; 73:101969. [PMID: 34157609 PMCID: PMC8316604 DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2021.101969] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2021] [Revised: 06/09/2021] [Accepted: 06/12/2021] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A standard measure of the cancer diagnostic pathway, diagnostic interval, is the time from "first presentation of cancer" to diagnosis. Cancer presentation may be unclear in patients with multimorbidity or non-specific symptoms, signs or test results ("features"). We propose an alternative, guideline interval, with a more certain start date; namely, when the patient first meets suspected-cancer criteria for investigation or referral. METHODS This retrospective cohort study used Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) and English cancer registry data. Participants, aged ≥55 years, had diagnostic codes for oesophagogastric cancers in 1/1/12-31/12/17. Features of oesophagogastric cancer in the year before diagnosis were identified from CPRD codes for dysphagia, haematemesis, upper-abdominal mass or pain, low haemoglobin, reflux, dyspepsia, nausea, vomiting, weight loss or thrombocytosis. Diagnostic interval was the time from first feature to diagnosis; guidance interval, the time from first meeting criteria in NICE suspected-cancer guidance to diagnosis. Multimorbidity burden was quantified using Adjusted Clinical Groups®. Accelerated failure-time models explored associations between multimorbidity burden and length of both diagnostic and guideline interval. RESULTS There were 3,793 eligible participants (69.0 % male), mean age 74.1 years (SD 10.5). 3,097 (81.7 %) presented with ≥1 feature in the year before diagnosis, and 1,990 (52.5 %) met NICE suspected-cancer criteria. The median for both intervals was 11 days in healthy users, and rose with increasing morbidity burden. At very high multimorbidity burden, diagnostic interval was 5.47 (95%CI 3.25-9.20) times longer and guideline interval was 3.91 (2.63-5.80) times longer than for healthy users. CONCLUSIONS Guideline interval is proposed as a new measure of the cancer diagnostic pathway. It has a more certain start date than diagnostic interval, and is lengthened less than diagnostic interval in people with a very high multimorbidity burden. Guideline interval has potential for assessing the implementation of suspected-cancer policies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Price
- College House, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
| | - Gary A Abel
- Smeall Building, University of Exeter, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
| | - Willie Hamilton
- College House, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Barclay ME, Abel GA, Greenberg DC, Rous B, Lyratzopoulos G. Socio-demographic variation in stage at diagnosis of breast, bladder, colon, endometrial, lung, melanoma, prostate, rectal, renal and ovarian cancer in England and its population impact. Br J Cancer 2021; 124:1320-1329. [PMID: 33564123 PMCID: PMC8007585 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-021-01279-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2020] [Revised: 11/20/2020] [Accepted: 12/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Stage at diagnosis strongly predicts cancer survival and understanding related inequalities could guide interventions. METHODS We analysed incident cases diagnosed with 10 solid tumours included in the UK government target of 75% of patients diagnosed in TNM stage I/II by 2028. We examined socio-demographic differences in diagnosis at stage III/IV vs. I/II. Multiple imputation was used for missing stage at diagnosis (9% of tumours). RESULTS Of the 202,001 cases, 57% were diagnosed in stage I/II (an absolute 18% 'gap' from the 75% target). The likelihood of diagnosis at stage III/IV increased in older age, though variably by cancer site, being strongest for prostate and endometrial cancer. Increasing level of deprivation was associated with advanced stage at diagnosis for all sites except lung and renal cancer. There were, inconsistent in direction, sex inequalities for four cancers. Eliminating socio-demographic inequalities would translate to 61% of patients with the 10 studied cancers being diagnosed at stage I/II, reducing the gap from target to 14%. CONCLUSIONS Potential elimination of socio-demographic inequalities in stage at diagnosis would make a substantial, though partial, contribution to achieving stage shift targets. Earlier diagnosis strategies should additionally focus on the whole population and not only the high-risk socio-demographic groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M E Barclay
- The Healthcare Improvement Studies (THIS) Institute, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - G A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Exeter, UK
| | - David C Greenberg
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, UK
| | - B Rous
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, UK
| | - G Lyratzopoulos
- The Healthcare Improvement Studies (THIS) Institute, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK.
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Zhou Y, Walter FM, Singh H, Hamilton W, Abel GA, Lyratzopoulos G. Prolonged Diagnostic Intervals as Marker of Missed Diagnostic Opportunities in Bladder and Kidney Cancer Patients with Alarm Features: A Longitudinal Linked Data Study. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:E156. [PMID: 33466406 PMCID: PMC7796444 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13010156] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2020] [Revised: 12/29/2020] [Accepted: 12/30/2020] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In England, patients who meet National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline criteria for suspected cancer should receive a specialist assessment within 14 days. We examined how quickly bladder and kidney cancer patients who met fast-track referral criteria were actually diagnosed. METHODS We used linked primary care and cancer registration data on bladder and kidney cancer patients who met fast-track referral criteria and examined the time from their first presentation with alarm features to diagnosis. Using logistic regression we examined factors most likely to be associated with non-timely diagnosis (defined as intervals exceeding 90 days), adjusting for age, sex and cancer type, positing that such occurrences represent missed opportunity for timely referral, possibly due to sub-optimal guideline adherence. RESULTS 28%, 42% and 31% of all urological cancer patients reported no, one or two or more relevant symptoms respectively in the year before diagnosis. Of the 2105 patients with alarm features warranting fast-track assessment, 1373 (65%) presented with unexplained haematuria, 382 (18%) with recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs), 303 (14%) with visible haematuria, and 45 (2%) with an abdominal mass. 27% overall, and 24%, 45%, 18% and 27% of each group respectively, had a non-timely diagnosis. Presentation with recurrent UTI was associated with longest median diagnostic interval (median 83 days, IQR 43-151) and visible haematuria with the shortest (median 50 days, IQR 30-79). After adjustment, presentation with recurrent UTIs, being in the youngest or oldest age group, female sex, and diagnosis of kidney and upper tract urothelial cancer, were associated with greater odds of non-timely diagnosis. CONCLUSION More than a quarter of patients presenting with fast-track referral features did not achieve a timely diagnosis, suggesting inadequate guideline adherence for some patients. The findings highlight a substantial number of opportunities for expediting the diagnosis of patients with bladder or kidney cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yin Zhou
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Worts’ Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK;
| | - Fiona M. Walter
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Worts’ Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK;
| | - Hardeep Singh
- Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA;
| | - William Hamilton
- College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Exeter EX1 1TX, UK; (W.H.); (G.A.A.)
| | - Gary A. Abel
- College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Exeter EX1 1TX, UK; (W.H.); (G.A.A.)
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK;
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Koo MM, Swann R, McPhail S, Abel GA, Renzi C, Rubin GP, Lyratzopoulos G. The prevalence of chronic conditions in patients diagnosed with one of 29 common and rarer cancers: A cross-sectional study using primary care data. Cancer Epidemiol 2020; 69:101845. [PMID: 33227628 PMCID: PMC7768190 DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2020.101845] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2020] [Revised: 10/09/2020] [Accepted: 10/14/2020] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pre-existing chronic conditions (morbidities) influence the diagnosis and management of cancer. The prevalence of specific morbidities in patients diagnosed with common and rarer cancers is inadequately described. METHODS Using data from the English National Cancer Diagnosis Audit 2014, we studied 11 pre-existing morbidities recorded as yes/no items by participating general practitioners based on information included in primary care records. We examined the number and type of morbidities across socio-demographic and cancer site strata, and subsequently estimated observed and age/sex standardised prevalence of each morbidity by cancer. RESULTS Over three-quarters (77 %; 11,429/14,774) of non-screen-detected patients had at least one chronic condition before diagnosis, while nearly half (47 %) had two or more. Hypertension (39 %) and physical disability (2%) were the most and least common conditions. Male, older and more socio-economically deprived patients were more likely to have at least one morbidity (p < 0.001 for all between variable group comparisons). For most morbidities, the standardised prevalence was similar across different cancers with a few exceptions, including respiratory disease prevalence being greatest among lung cancer patients and diabetes prevalence being greatest among liver, pancreatic, and endometrial cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS Most cancer patients have at least one morbidity, while almost one in two have two or more. The findings highlight the need to take certain morbidity- and cancer-site combinations into account when examining associations between morbidity and cancer outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Minjoung Monica Koo
- University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, Wellington House, 133-155 Waterloo Road, London, SE1 8UG, UK.
| | - Ruth Swann
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, Wellington House, 133-155 Waterloo Road, London, SE1 8UG, UK; Cancer Research UK, 2 Redman Place, London, E20 1JQ, UK
| | - Sean McPhail
- University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, Wellington House, 133-155 Waterloo Road, London, SE1 8UG, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK
| | - Cristina Renzi
- University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Greg P Rubin
- Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Sir James Spence Institute, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 4LP, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, Wellington House, 133-155 Waterloo Road, London, SE1 8UG, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Gomez-Cano M, Lyratzopoulos G, Abel GA. Patient Experience Drivers of Overall Satisfaction With Care in Cancer Patients: Evidence From Responders to the English Cancer Patient Experience Survey. J Patient Exp 2020; 7:758-765. [PMID: 33294612 PMCID: PMC7705845 DOI: 10.1177/2374373519889435] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Surveys collecting patient experience data often contain a large number of items covering a wide range of experiences. Knowing which areas to prioritize for improvements efforts can be difficult. OBJECTIVE To examine which aspects of care experience are the key drivers of overall satisfaction with cancer care. METHODS Secondary analysis of the National Cancer Patient Experience Survey. Logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between overall satisfaction and 10 core questions covering aspects of experience applicable to all patients. Supplementary analyses examined a further 16 questions applying only to patients in certain groups or on specific treatment pathways. RESULTS Of 68 340 included patients, 58 697 (86%) rated overall satisfaction highly (8 or more out of 10). The strongest predictors of overall satisfaction across all models were responses to 2 questions on experience of care administration and care coordination (odds ratio [OR] = 2.11, 95% confidence interval [95% CI = 2.05-2.17, P < .0001; OR = 2.03, 95% CI = 1.97-2.09, P < .0001, respectively, per 1 standard deviation change). CONCLUSION Focusing improvement efforts on care administration and coordination has potential to improve overall satisfaction with oncological care across diverse patient groups/care pathways.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mayam Gomez-Cano
- University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare & Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, United Kingdom
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Koo MM, Lyratzopoulos G, Herbert A, Abel GA, Taylor RM, Barber JA, Gibson F, Whelan J, Fern LA. Association of Self-reported Presenting Symptoms With Timeliness of Help-Seeking Among Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer in the BRIGHTLIGHT Study. JAMA Netw Open 2020; 3:e2015437. [PMID: 32880648 PMCID: PMC7489839 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.15437] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2020] [Accepted: 06/20/2020] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Importance Evidence regarding the presenting symptoms of cancer in adolescents and young adults can support the development of early diagnosis interventions. Objective To examine common presenting symptoms in adolescents and young adults aged 12 to 24 years who subsequently received a diagnosis of cancer and potential variation in time to help-seeking by presenting symptom. Design, Setting, and Participants This multicenter study is a cross-sectional analysis of the BRIGHTLIGHT cohort study, which was conducted across hospitals in England. Participants included adolescents and young adults aged 12 to 24 years with cancer. Information on 17 prespecified presenting symptoms and the interval between symptom onset and help-seeking (the patient interval) was collected through structured face-to-face interviews and was linked to national cancer registry data. Data analysis was performed from January 2018 to August 2019. Exposures Self-reported presenting symptoms. Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcomes were frequencies of presenting symptoms and associated symptom signatures by cancer group and the proportion of patients with each presenting symptom whose patient interval was longer than 1 month. Results The study population consisted of 803 adolescents and young adults with valid symptom information (443 male [55%]; 509 [63%] aged 19-24 years; 705 [88%] White). The number of symptoms varied by cancer group: for example, 88 patients with leukemia (86%) presented with 2 or more symptoms, whereas only 9 patients with melanoma (31%) presented with multiple symptoms. In total, 352 unique symptom combinations were reported, with the 10 most frequent combinations accounting for 304 patients (38%). Lump or swelling was reported by more than one-half the patients (419 patients [52%; 95% CI, 49%-56%]). Other common presenting symptoms across all cancers were extreme tiredness (308 patients [38%; 95% CI, 35%-42%]), unexplained pain (281 patients [35%; 95% CI, 32%-38%]), night sweats (192 patients [24%; 95% CI, 21%-27%]), lymphadenopathy (191 patients [24%; 95% CI, 21%-27%]), and weight loss (190 patients [24%; 95% CI, 21%-27%]). The relative frequencies of presenting symptoms also varied by cancer group; some symptoms (such as lump or swelling) were highly prevalent across several cancer groups (seen in >50% of patients with lymphomas, germ cell cancers, carcinomas, bone tumors, and soft-tissue sarcomas). More than 1 in 4 patients (27%) reported a patient interval longer than 1 month; this varied from 6% (1 patient) for fits and seizures to 43% (18 patients) for recurrent infections. Conclusions and Relevance Adolescents and young adults with cancer present with a broad spectrum of symptoms, some of which are shared across cancer types. These findings point to discordant presenting symptom prevalence estimates when information is obtained from patient report vs health records and indicate the need for further symptom epidemiology research in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Minjoung M. Koo
- Epidemiology of Cancer and Healthcare Outcomes Research Group, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer and Healthcare Outcomes Research Group, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Annie Herbert
- Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Gary A. Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke’s Campus, Exeter, United Kingdom
| | - Rachel M. Taylor
- Centre for Nurse, Midwife, and Allied Health Professional-led Research, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Julie A. Barber
- Department of Statistical Science, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Faith Gibson
- Centre for Outcomes and Experience Research in Children’s Health, Illness and Disability, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
- School of Health Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom
| | - Jeremy Whelan
- Cancer Division, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Lorna A. Fern
- Cancer Division, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Zhou Y, Abel GA, Hamilton W, Singh H, Walter FM, Lyratzopoulos G. Imaging activity possibly signalling missed diagnostic opportunities in bladder and kidney cancer: A longitudinal data-linkage study using primary care electronic health records. Cancer Epidemiol 2020; 66:101703. [PMID: 32334389 PMCID: PMC7294227 DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2020.101703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2019] [Revised: 02/13/2020] [Accepted: 03/12/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Sub-optimal use or interpretation of imaging investigations prior to diagnosis of certain cancers may be associated with less timely diagnosis, but pre-diagnostic imaging activity for urological cancer is unknown. METHOD We analysed linked data derived from primary and secondary care records and cancer registration to evaluate the use of clinically relevant imaging tests pre-diagnosis, in patients with bladder and kidney cancer diagnosed in 2012-15 in England. As pre-diagnostic imaging activity increased from background rate 8 months pre-diagnosis, we used logistic regression to determine factors associated with first imaging test occurring 4-8 months pre-diagnosis, considering that such instances may reflect possible missed opportunities for expediting the diagnosis. RESULTS 1963 patients with bladder or kidney cancer had at least one imaging test in the 8 months pre-diagnosis. 420 (21%) of patients had their first imaging test 4-8 months pre-diagnosis, that being ultrasound, CT and X-ray in 48%, 43% and 9% of those cases, respectively. Factors associated with greater risk of a first imaging test 4-8 months pre-diagnosis were kidney cancer, diagnosis at stages other than stage IV, first imaging having been an X-ray, test requested by GP and absence of haematuria before the imaging request. CONCLUSION About 1 in 5 patients with urological cancers receive relevant first imaging investigations 4-8 months prior to diagnosis, which may represent potential missed diagnostic opportunities for earlier diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yin Zhou
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
| | - Gary A Abel
- College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Exeter, UK
| | - William Hamilton
- College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Exeter, UK
| | - Hardeep Singh
- Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Fiona M Walter
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Lyratzopoulos G, Abel GA. Assessing patients at risk of symptomatic-but-as-yet-undiagnosed cancer in primary care using information from patient records. Br J Cancer 2020; 122:1729-1731. [PMID: 32291393 PMCID: PMC7283330 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-020-0828-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2020] [Revised: 03/10/2020] [Accepted: 03/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Evidence arising from primary care electronic health records can help to assess the risk of symptomatic-but-as-yet-undiagnosed cancer. Existing evidence and methodological innovations in this field of study hold further promise for improving the diagnostic process and achieving earlier diagnosis in cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK.
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, Smeall Building, St. Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2 LU, UK
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Herbert A, Koo MM, Barclay ME, Greenberg DC, Abel GA, Levell NJ, Lyratzopoulos G. Stage-specific incidence trends of melanoma in an English region, 1996-2015: longitudinal analyses of population-based data. Melanoma Res 2020; 30:279-285. [PMID: 30106842 PMCID: PMC6330074 DOI: 10.1097/cmr.0000000000000489] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
The aim of this study was to examine temporal trends in overall and stage-specific incidence of melanoma. Using population-based data on patients diagnosed with melanoma in East Anglia, England, 1996-2015, we estimated age-standardized time trends in annual incidence rates for each stage at diagnosis. Negative binomial regression was used to model trends over time adjusted for sex, age group and deprivation, and to subsequently examine variation in stage-specific trends by sex and age group. The age-standardized incidence increased from 14 to 29 cases/100 000 persons (i.e. 4% annually). Increasing incidence was apparent across all stages but was steepest for stage I [adjusted annual increase: 5%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 5-6%, and more gradual for stage II-IV disease (stage II: 3%, 95% CI: 2-4%; stage III/IV: 2%, 95% CI: 1-3%)]. Stage II-IV increase was apparent in men across age groups and in women aged 50 years or older. Increases in incidence were steeper in those aged 70 years or older, and in men. The findings suggest that both a genuine increase in the incidence of consequential illness and a degree of overdiagnosis may be responsible for the observed increasing incidence trends in melanoma in our population during the study period. They also suggest the potentially lower effectiveness of public health awareness campaigns in men and older people.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annie Herbert
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare & Outcomes (ECHO) research group, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, UK
| | - Minjoung M. Koo
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare & Outcomes (ECHO) research group, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, UK
| | - Matthew E. Barclay
- Public Health England National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Victoria House, Capital Park, Fulbourn, Cambridge, UK
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, Cambridge, UK
| | - David C. Greenberg
- Public Health England National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Victoria House, Capital Park, Fulbourn, Cambridge, UK
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Nick J. Levell
- Dermatology Department, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare & Outcomes (ECHO) research group, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, UK
- Public Health England National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Victoria House, Capital Park, Fulbourn, Cambridge, UK
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Abel GA, Gomez-Cano M, Mustafee N, Smart A, Fletcher E, Salisbury C, Chilvers R, Dean SG, Richards SH, Warren F, Campbell JL. Workforce predictive risk modelling: development of a model to identify general practices at risk of a supply-demand imbalance. BMJ Open 2020; 10:e027934. [PMID: 31980504 PMCID: PMC7044996 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027934] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to develop a risk prediction model identifying general practices at risk of workforce supply-demand imbalance. DESIGN This is a secondary analysis of routine data on general practice workforce, patient experience and registered populations (2012 to 2016), combined with a census of general practitioners' (GPs') career intentions (2016). SETTING/PARTICIPANTS A hybrid approach was used to develop a model to predict workforce supply-demand imbalance based on practice factors using historical data (2012-2016) on all general practices in England (with over 1000 registered patients n=6398). The model was applied to current data (2016) to explore future risk for practices in South West England (n=368). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE The primary outcome was a practice being in a state of workforce supply-demand imbalance operationally defined as being in the lowest third nationally of access scores according to the General Practice Patient Survey and the highest third nationally according to list size per full-time equivalent GP (weighted to the demographic distribution of registered patients and adjusted for deprivation). RESULTS Based on historical data, the predictive model had fair to good discriminatory ability to predict which practices faced supply-demand imbalance (area under receiver operating characteristic curve=0.755). Predictions using current data suggested that, on average, practices at highest risk of future supply-demand imbalance are currently characterised by having larger patient lists, employing more nurses, serving more deprived and younger populations, and having considerably worse patient experience ratings when compared with other practices. Incorporating findings from a survey of GP's career intentions made little difference to predictions of future supply-demand risk status when compared with expected future workforce projections based only on routinely available data on GPs' gender and age. CONCLUSIONS It is possible to make reasonable predictions of an individual general practice's future risk of undersupply of GP workforce with respect to its patient population. However, the predictions are inherently limited by the data available.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Mayam Gomez-Cano
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | | | - Andi Smart
- University of Exeter Business School, Exeter, UK
| | - Emily Fletcher
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Chris Salisbury
- Centre for Academic Primary Care, NIHR School for Primary Care Research, School of Socialand Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | - Sarah Gerard Dean
- PenCLAHRC University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | | | - F Warren
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - John L Campbell
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Koo MM, Swann R, McPhail S, Abel GA, Elliss-Brookes L, Rubin GP, Lyratzopoulos G. Presenting symptoms of cancer and stage at diagnosis: evidence from a cross-sectional, population-based study. Lancet Oncol 2020; 21:73-79. [PMID: 31704137 PMCID: PMC6941215 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(19)30595-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 101] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2019] [Revised: 09/12/2019] [Accepted: 09/13/2019] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Early diagnosis interventions such as symptom awareness campaigns increasingly form part of global cancer control strategies. However, these strategies will have little impact in improving cancer outcomes if the targeted symptoms represent advanced stage of disease. Therefore, we aimed to examine associations between common presenting symptoms of cancer and stage at diagnosis. METHODS In this cross-sectional study, we analysed population-level data from the English National Cancer Diagnosis Audit 2014 for patients aged 25 years and older with one of 12 types of solid tumours (bladder, breast, colon, endometrial, laryngeal, lung, melanoma, oral or oropharyngeal, ovarian, prostate, rectal, and renal cancer). We considered 20 common presenting symptoms and examined their associations with stage at diagnosis (TNM stage IV vs stage I-III) using logistic regression. For each symptom, we estimated these associations when reported as a single presenting symptom and when reported together with other symptoms. FINDINGS We analysed data for 7997 patients. The proportion of patients diagnosed with stage IV cancer varied substantially by presenting symptom, from 1% (95% CI 1-3; eight of 584 patients) for abnormal mole to 80% (71-87; 84 of 105 patients) for neck lump. Three of the examined symptoms (neck lump, chest pain, and back pain) were consistently associated with increased odds of stage IV cancer, whether reported alone or with other symptoms, whereas the opposite was true for abnormal mole, breast lump, postmenopausal bleeding, and rectal bleeding. For 13 of the 20 symptoms (abnormal mole, breast lump, post-menopausal bleeding, rectal bleeding, lower urinary tract symptoms, haematuria, change in bowel habit, hoarseness, fatigue, abdominal pain, lower abdominal pain, weight loss, and the "any other symptom" category), more than 50% of patients were diagnosed at stages other than stage IV; for 19 of the 20 studied symptoms (all except for neck lump), more than a third of patients were diagnosed at stages other than stage IV. INTERPRETATION Despite specific presenting symptoms being more strongly associated with advanced stage at diagnosis than others, for most symptoms, large proportions of patients are diagnosed at stages other than stage IV. These findings provide support for early diagnosis interventions targeting common cancer symptoms, countering concerns that they might be simply expediting the detection of advanced stage disease. FUNDING UK Department of Health's Policy Research Unit in Cancer Awareness, Screening and Early Diagnosis; and Cancer Research UK.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Minjoung Monica Koo
- University College London, London, UK; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, UK.
| | - Ruth Swann
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, UK; Cancer Research UK, London, UK
| | - Sean McPhail
- University College London, London, UK; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, UK
| | - Lucy Elliss-Brookes
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, UK
| | - Greg P Rubin
- Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Sir James Spence Institute, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- University College London, London, UK; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Herbert A, Winters S, McPhail S, Elliss-Brookes L, Lyratzopoulos G, Abel GA. Population trends in emergency cancer diagnoses: The role of changing patient case-mix. Cancer Epidemiol 2019; 63:101574. [PMID: 31655434 PMCID: PMC6905147 DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2019.101574] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2019] [Revised: 07/15/2019] [Accepted: 07/18/2019] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diagnosis of cancer through an emergency presentation is associated with worse clinical and patient experience outcomes. The proportion of patients with cancer who are diagnosed through emergency presentations has consequently been introduced as a routine cancer surveillance measure in England. Welcome reductions in this metric have been reported over more than a decade but whether reductions reflect true changes in how patients are diagnosed rather than the changing case-mix of incident cohorts in unknown. METHODS We analysed 'Routes to Diagnosis' data on cancer patients (2006-2015) and used logistic regression modelling to determine the contribution of changes in four case-mix variables (sex, age, deprivation, cancer site) to time-trends in emergency presentations. RESULTS Between 2006 and 2015 there was an absolute 4.7 percentage point reduction in emergency presentations (23.8%-19.2%). Changing distributions of the four case-mix variables explained 19.0% of this reduction, leaving 81.0% unexplained. Changes in cancer site case-mix alone explained 16.0% of the total reduction. CONCLUSION Changes in case-mix (particularly that of cancer sites) account for about a fifth of the overall reduction in emergency presentations. This would support the use of adjustment/standardisation of reported statistics to support their interpretation and help appreciate the influence of case-mix, particularly regarding cancer sites with changing incidence. However, most of the reduction in emergency presentations remains unaccounted for, and likely reflects genuine changes during the study period in how patients were being diagnosed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Herbert
- MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit Bristol Medical School University of Bristol Bristol UK; Epidemiology of Cancer and Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, UK
| | - S Winters
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, 6th Floor, Wellington House, 135-155 Waterloo Road, London, UK
| | - S McPhail
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, 6th Floor, Wellington House, 135-155 Waterloo Road, London, UK
| | - L Elliss-Brookes
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, 6th Floor, Wellington House, 135-155 Waterloo Road, London, UK
| | - G Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer and Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, UK; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, 6th Floor, Wellington House, 135-155 Waterloo Road, London, UK; Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, Cambridge, UK.
| | - G A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Barclay ME, Abel GA, Elliss-Brookes L, Greenberg DC, Lyratzopoulos G. The influence of patient case mix on public health area statistics for cancer stage at diagnosis: a cross-sectional study. Eur J Public Health 2019; 29:1103-1107. [PMID: 30869123 PMCID: PMC6896974 DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckz024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND statistics comparing the stage at diagnosis of geographically defined populations of cancer patients are increasingly used in public reporting to monitor geographical inequalities but may be confounded by patient case mix. We explore the impact of case-mix adjustment on a publicly reported measure of early stage at diagnosis in England. METHODS We analyzed data used for publicly reported statistics about the stage of patients diagnosed with 1 of 11 solid tumours in 2015 in England, including information on cancer site (bladder, breast, colon, rectum, kidney, lung, melanoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, ovarian, prostate, endometrial), age, gender, income deprivation and population-based commissioning organization. We investigated how cancer site and other patient characteristics influence organizational comparisons and attainment of early-stage targets (≥60% of all cases diagnosed in TNM stages I-II). RESULTS Adjusting for patient case mix reduced between-organization variance by more than 50%, resulting in appreciable discordance in organizational ranks (Kendall's tau = 0.53), with 18% (37/207) of organizations being reclassified as meeting/failing the early-stage target due to case mix. CONCLUSION Summary statistics on stage of cancer diagnosis for geographical populations currently used as public health surveillance tools to monitor organizational inequalities need to account for patient sociodemographic characteristics and cancer site case mix.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew E Barclay
- The Healthcare Improvement Studies (THIS) Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- Medical School (Primary Care), University of Exeter, Exeter,UK
| | - Lucy Elliss-Brookes
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, UK
| | - David C Greenberg
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- The Healthcare Improvement Studies (THIS) Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, UK
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Mendonca SC, Abel GA, Gildea C, McPhail S, Peake MD, Rubin G, Singh H, Hamilton W, Walter FM, Roland MO, Lyratzopoulos G. Associations between general practice characteristics with use of urgent referrals for suspected cancer and endoscopies: a cross-sectional ecological study. Fam Pract 2019; 36:573-580. [PMID: 30541076 PMCID: PMC6781939 DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmy118] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Large variation in measures of diagnostic activity has been described previously between English general practices, but related predictors remain understudied. OBJECTIVE To examine associations between general practice population and characteristics, with the use of urgent referrals for suspected cancer, and use of endoscopy. METHODS Cross-sectional observational study of English general practices. We examined practice-level use (/1000 patients/year) of urgent referrals for suspected cancer, gastroscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. We used mixed-effects Poisson regression to examine associations with the sociodemographic profile of practice populations and other practice attributes, including the average age, sex and country of qualification of practice doctors. RESULTS The sociodemographic characteristics of registered patients explained much of the between-practice variance in use of urgent referrals (32%) and endoscopic investigations (18-25%), all being higher in practices with older and more socioeconomically deprived patients. Practice-level attributes explained a substantial amount of between-practice variance in urgent referral (19%) but little of the variance in endoscopy (3%-4%). Adjusted urgent referral rates were higher in training practices and those with younger GPs. Practices with mean doctor ages of 41 and 57 years (at the 10th/90th centiles of the national distribution) would have urgent referral rates of 24.1 and 19.1/1000 registered patients, P < 0.001. CONCLUSION Most between-practice variation in use of urgent referrals and endoscopies seems to reflect health need. Some practice characteristics, such as the mean age of GPs, are associated with appreciable variation in use of urgent referrals, though these associations do not seem strong enough to justify targeted interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Silvia C Mendonca
- The Health Improvement Institute (THIS), University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Exeter, UK
| | - Carolynn Gildea
- National Cancer Analysis and Registration Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London, UK
| | - Sean McPhail
- National Cancer Analysis and Registration Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London, UK
| | - Michael D Peake
- National Cancer Analysis and Registration Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London, UK
- University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Greg Rubin
- Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Sir James Spence Institute, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Hardeep Singh
- Houston VA Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Willie Hamilton
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Exeter, UK
| | - Fiona M Walter
- The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Martin O Roland
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- The Health Improvement Institute (THIS), University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- National Cancer Analysis and Registration Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London, UK
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Herbert A, Abel GA, Winters S, McPhail S, Elliss-Brookes L, Lyratzopoulos G. Cancer diagnoses after emergency GP referral or A&E attendance in England: determinants and time trends in Routes to Diagnosis data, 2006-2015. Br J Gen Pract 2019; 69:e724-e730. [PMID: 31455644 PMCID: PMC6713517 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp19x705473] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2019] [Accepted: 05/14/2019] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diagnosis of cancer as an emergency is associated with poor outcomes but has a complex aetiology. Examining determinants and time trends in diagnostic routes can help to appreciate the critical role of general practice over time in diagnostic pathways for patients with cancer. AIM To examine sociodemographic, cancer site, and temporal associations with type of presentation among patients with cancer diagnosed as emergencies. DESIGN AND SETTING Analysis of Routes to Diagnosis data, 2006-2015, for patients with cancer in England. METHOD The authors estimated adjusted proportions of emergency presentation after emergency GP referral (GP-EP) or presentation to accident and emergency (AE-EP), by patient sex, age, deprivation group, and year of diagnosis using multivariable regression. RESULTS Among 554 621 patients presenting as emergencies, 24% (n = 130 372) presented as GP-EP, 62% as AE-EP (n = 346 192), and 14% (n = 78 057) through Other-EP sub-routes. Patients presenting as emergencies were more likely to have been GP-referred if they lived in less deprived areas or were subsequently diagnosed with pancreatic, gallbladder, or ovarian cancer, or acute leukaemia. During the study period the proportion and number of GP-EPs nearly halved (31%, n = 17 364, in 2006; 17%, n = 9155 in 2015), while that of AE-EP increased (55%, n = 31 049 to 68%, n = 36 868). CONCLUSION Patients presenting as emergencies with cancers characterised by symptoms/signs tolerable by patients but appropriately alarming to doctors (for example, pancreatic cancer manifesting as painless jaundice) are over-represented among cases whose emergency presentation involved GP referral. Reductions in diagnoses of cancer through an emergency presentation likely reflect both the continually increasing use of 2-week-wait GP referrals during the study period and reductions in emergency GP referrals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annie Herbert
- MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol; formerly at Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, University College London, London; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Exeter; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London
| | - Sam Winters
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London
| | - Sean McPhail
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London
| | - Lucy Elliss-Brookes
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, University College London, London; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Pham TM, Gomez-Cano M, Salika T, Jardel D, Abel GA, Lyratzopoulos G. Diagnostic route is associated with care satisfaction independently of tumour stage: Evidence from linked English Cancer Patient Experience Survey and cancer registration data. Cancer Epidemiol 2019; 61:70-78. [PMID: 31153049 DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2019.04.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2018] [Revised: 03/08/2019] [Accepted: 04/26/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Whether diagnostic route (e.g. emergency presentation) is associated with cancer care experience independently of tumour stage is unknown. METHODS We analysed data on 18 590 patients with breast, prostate, colon, lung, and rectal cancers who responded to the 2014 English Cancer Patient Experience Survey, linked to cancer registration data on diagnostic route and tumour stage at diagnosis. We estimated odds ratios (OR) of reporting a negative experience of overall cancer care by tumour stage and diagnostic route (crude and adjusted for patient characteristic and cancer site variables) and examined their interactions with cancer site. RESULTS After adjustment, the likelihood of reporting a negative experience was highest for emergency presenters and lowest for screening-detected patients with breast, colon, and rectal cancers (OR versus two-week-wait 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24-1.83; 0.88, 95% CI 0.75-1.03, respectively). Patients with the most advanced stage were more likely to report a negative experience (OR stage IV versus I 1.37, 95% CI 1.15-1.62) with little confounding between stage and route, and no evidence for cancer-stage or cancer-route interactions. CONCLUSIONS Though the extent of disease is strongly associated with ratings of overall cancer care, diagnostic route (particularly emergency presentation or screening detection) exerts important independent effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tra My Pham
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, WC1E 7HB, London, UK
| | - Mayam Gomez-Cano
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Smeall Building, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK
| | - Theodosia Salika
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, WC1E 7HB, London, UK
| | - Demian Jardel
- Cancer Alliance Data, Evidence and Analysis Service (CADEAS), NHS England, Skipton House, 80 London Road, London, SE1 6LH, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Smeall Building, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, WC1E 7HB, London, UK; Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Abel GA, Gomez-Cano M, Pham TM, Lyratzopoulos G. Reliability of hospital scores for the Cancer Patient Experience Survey: analysis of publicly reported patient survey data. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e029037. [PMID: 31345975 PMCID: PMC6661614 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2019] [Revised: 06/04/2019] [Accepted: 06/06/2019] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To assess the degree to which variations in publicly reported hospital scores arising from the English Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES) are subject to chance. DESIGN Secondary analysis of publically reported data. SETTING English National Health Service hospitals. PARTICIPANTS 72 756 patients who were recently treated for cancer in one of 146 hospitals and responded to the 2016 English CPES. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Spearman-Brown reliability of hospital scores on 51 evaluative questions regarding cancer care. RESULTS Hospitals varied in respondent sample size with a median hospital sample size of 419 responses (range 31-1972). There were some hospitals with generally highly reliable scores across most questions, whereas other hospitals had generally unreliable scores (the median reliability of question scores within individual hospitals varied between 0.11 and 0.86). Similarly, there were some questions with generally high reliability across most hospitals, whereas other questions had generally low reliability. Of the 7377 individual hospital scores publically reported (146 hospitals by 51 questions, minus 69 suppressed scores), only 34% reached a reliability of 0.7, the minimum generally considered to be useful. In order for 80% of the individual hospital scores to reach a reliability of 0.7, some hospitals would require a fourfold increase in number of respondents; although in a few other hospitals sample sizes could be reduced. CONCLUSIONS The English Patient Experience Survey represents a globally unique source for understanding experience of a patient with cancer; but in its present form, it is not reliable for high stakes comparisons of the performance of different hospitals. Revised sampling strategies and survey questions could help increase the reliability of hospital scores, and thus make the survey fit for use in performance comparisons.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Mayam Gomez-Cano
- University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Tra My Pham
- Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
- Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Health Behaviour Research Centre, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Walter FM, Thompson MJ, Wellwood I, Abel GA, Hamilton W, Johnson M, Lyratzopoulos G, Messenger MP, Neal RD, Rubin G, Singh H, Spencer A, Sutton S, Vedsted P, Emery JD. Evaluating diagnostic strategies for early detection of cancer: the CanTest framework. BMC Cancer 2019; 19:586. [PMID: 31200676 PMCID: PMC6570853 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5746-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2018] [Accepted: 05/23/2019] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Novel diagnostic triage and testing strategies to support early detection of cancer could improve clinical outcomes. Most apparently promising diagnostic tests ultimately fail because of inadequate performance in real-world, low prevalence populations such as primary care or general community populations. They should therefore be systematically evaluated before implementation to determine whether they lead to earlier detection, are cost-effective, and improve patient safety and quality of care, while minimising over-investigation and over-diagnosis. METHODS We performed a systematic scoping review of frameworks for the evaluation of tests and diagnostic approaches. RESULTS We identified 16 frameworks: none addressed the entire continuum from test development to impact on diagnosis and patient outcomes in the intended population, nor the way in which tests may be used for triage purposes as part of a wider diagnostic strategy. Informed by these findings, we developed a new framework, the 'CanTest Framework', which proposes five iterative research phases forming a clear translational pathway from new test development to health system implementation and evaluation. CONCLUSION This framework is suitable for testing in low prevalence populations, where tests are often applied for triage testing and incorporated into a wider diagnostic strategy. It has relevance for a wide range of stakeholders including patients, policymakers, purchasers, healthcare providers and industry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fiona M. Walter
- The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health & Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB1 8RN UK
| | | | - Ian Wellwood
- The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health & Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB1 8RN UK
| | - Gary A. Abel
- University of Exeter, St Luke’s Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU UK
| | | | - Margaret Johnson
- The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health & Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB1 8RN UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, University College London, London, UK
| | - Michael P. Messenger
- National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Leeds In Vitro Diagnostic Cooperative (IVDC), Leeds Centre for Personalised Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Richard D. Neal
- Academic Unit of Primary Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Greg Rubin
- Institute of Health and Society, University of Newcastle, Sir James Spence Institute, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle, NE1 4LP UK
| | - Hardeep Singh
- Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX USA
| | - Anne Spencer
- Health Economics Group, University of Exeter, St Luke’s Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU Devon UK
| | - Stephen Sutton
- The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health & Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB1 8RN UK
| | - Peter Vedsted
- Research Centre for Cancer Diagnosis – CaP, The Research Unit for General Practice and Research Clinic for Innovative Health Care Delivery, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Bartholins Alle 2, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Jon D. Emery
- Centre for Cancer Research and Department of General Practice, University of Melbourne, 10th floor, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan St, Melbourne, VIC 3010 Australia
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Pham TM, Abel GA, Gomez-Cano M, Lyratzopoulos G. Predictors of Postal or Online Response Mode and Associations With Patient Experience and Satisfaction in the English Cancer Patient Experience Survey. J Med Internet Res 2019; 21:e11855. [PMID: 31045503 PMCID: PMC6521193 DOI: 10.2196/11855] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2018] [Revised: 01/02/2019] [Accepted: 01/21/2019] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patient experience surveys are important tools for improving the quality of cancer services, but the representativeness of responders is a concern. Increasingly, patient surveys that traditionally used postal questionnaires are incorporating an online response option. However, the characteristics and experience ratings of online responders are poorly understood. OBJECTIVE We sought to examine predictors of postal or online response mode, and associations with patient experience in the (English) Cancer Patient Experience Survey. METHODS We analyzed data from 71,186 patients with cancer recently treated in National Health Service hospitals who responded to the Cancer Patient Experience Survey 2015. Using logistic regression, we explored patient characteristics associated with greater probability of online response and whether, after adjustment for patient characteristics, the online response was associated with a more or less critical evaluation of cancer care compared to the postal response. RESULTS Of the 63,134 patients included in the analysis, 4635 (7.34%) responded online. In an adjusted analysis, male (women vs men: odds ratio [OR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46-0.54), younger (<55 vs 65-74 years: OR 3.49, 95% CI 3.21-3.80), least deprived (most vs least deprived quintile: OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.51-0.64), and nonwhite (nonwhite vs white ethnic group: OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.24-1.51) patients were more likely to respond online. Compared to postal responders, after adjustment for patient characteristics, online responders had a higher likelihood of reporting an overall satisfied experience of care (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.16-1.32). For 34 of 49 other items, online responders more frequently reported a less than positive experience of care (8 reached statistical significance), and the associations were positive for the remaining 15 of 49 items (2 reached statistical significance). CONCLUSIONS In the context of a national survey of patients with cancer, online and postal responders tend to differ in their characteristics and rating of satisfaction. Associations between online response and reported experience were generally small and mostly nonsignificant, but with a tendency toward less than positive ratings, although not consistently. Whether the observed associations between response mode and reported experience were causal needs to be examined using experimental survey designs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tra My Pham
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom
| | - Mayam Gomez-Cano
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Exley J, Abel GA, Fernandez JL, Pitchforth E, Mendonca S, Yang M, Roland M, McGuire A. Impact of the Southwark and Lambeth Integrated Care Older People's Programme on hospital utilisation and costs: controlled time series and cost-consequence analysis. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e024220. [PMID: 30833317 PMCID: PMC6443075 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024220] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To estimate the impact on hospital utilisation and costs of a multi-faceted primary care intervention for older people identified as being at risk of avoidable hospitalisation. DESIGN Observational study: controlled time series analysis and estimation of costs and cost consequences of the Programme. General practitioner (GP)'s practice level data were analysed from 2009 to 2016 (intervention operated from 2012 to 2016). Mixed-effect Poisson regression models of hospital utilisation included comparisons with control practices and background trends in addition to within-practice comparisons. Cost estimation used standard tariff values. SETTING 94 practices in Southwark and Lambeth and 263 control practices from other parts of England. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Hospital utilisation: emergency department attendance, emergency admissions, emergency admissions for ambulatory sensitive conditions, outpatient attendance, elective admission and length of stay. RESULTS By the fourth year of the Programme, there were reductions in accident and emergency (A&E) attendance (rate ratio 0.944, 95% CI 0.913 to 0.976), outpatient attendances (rate ratio 0.938, 95% CI 0.902 to 0.975) and elective admissions (rate ratio 0.921, 95% CI 0.908 to 0.935) but there was no evidence of reduced emergency admissions. The costs of the Programme were £149 per resident aged 65 and above but savings in hospital costs were only £86 per resident aged 65 and above, equivalent to a net increase in health service expenditure of £64 per resident though the Programme was nearly cost neutral if set-up costs were excluded. Holistic assessments carried out by GPs and consequent Integrated Care Management (ICM) plans were associated with increases in elective activity and costs; £126 increase in outpatient attendance and £936 in elective admission costs per holistic assessment carried out, and £576 increase in outpatient and £5858 in elective admission costs per patient receiving ICM. CONCLUSIONS The Older People's Programme was not cost saving. Some aspects of the Programme were associated with increased costs of elective care, possibly through the identification of unmet need.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Josephine Exley
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, RAND Europe, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - José-Luis Fernandez
- Personal Social Services Research Unit, London School of Economics, London, UK
| | | | - Silvia Mendonca
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Miaoqing Yang
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, RAND Europe, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK
| | - Martin Roland
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Alistair McGuire
- Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Herbert A, Abel GA, Winters S, McPhail S, Elliss-Brookes L, Lyratzopoulos G. Are inequalities in cancer diagnosis through emergency presentation narrowing, widening or remaining unchanged? Longitudinal analysis of English population-based data 2006-2013. J Epidemiol Community Health 2019; 73:3-10. [PMID: 30409920 PMCID: PMC6839789 DOI: 10.1136/jech-2017-210371] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2017] [Revised: 08/01/2018] [Accepted: 08/31/2018] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diagnosis of cancer through emergency presentation is associated with poorer prognosis. While reductions in emergency presentations have been described, whether known sociodemographic inequalities are changing is uncertain. METHODS We analysed 'Routes to Diagnosis' data on patients aged ≥25 years diagnosed in England during 2006-2013 with any of 33 common or rarer cancers. Using binary logistic regression we determined time-trends in diagnosis through emergency presentation by age, deprivation and cancer site. RESULTS Overall adjusted proportions of emergency presentations decreased during the study period (2006: 23%, 2013: 20%). Substantial baseline (2006) inequalities in emergency presentation risk by age and deprivation remained largely unchanged. There was evidence (p<0.05) of reductions in the risk of emergency presentations for most (28/33) cancer sites, without apparent associations between the size of reduction and baseline risk (p=0.26). If there had been modest reductions in age inequalities (ie, patients in each age group acquiring the same percentage of emergency presentations as the adjacent group with lower risk), in the last study year we could have expected around 11 000 fewer diagnoses through emergency presentation (ie, a nationwide percentage of 16% rather than the observed 20%). For similarly modest reductions in deprivation inequalities, we could have expected around 3000 fewer (ie, 19%). CONCLUSION The proportion of cancer diagnoses through emergency presentation is decreasing but age and deprivation inequalities prevail, indicating untapped opportunities for further improvements by reducing these inequalities. The observed reductions in proportions across nearly all cancer sites are likely to reflect both earlier help-seeking and improvements in diagnostic healthcare pathways, across both easier-to-suspect and harder-to-suspect cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annie Herbert
- ECHO (Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Exeter, UK
| | - Sam Winters
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London, UK
| | - Sean McPhail
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London, UK
| | - Lucy Elliss-Brookes
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- ECHO (Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, UK
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), Public Health England, London, UK
- THIS (The Health Improvement Studies) Institute, and Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge, Institute of Public Health, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Marang-van de Mheen PJ, Abel GA, Shojania KG. Mortality alerts, actions taken and declining mortality: true effect or regression to the mean? BMJ Qual Saf 2018; 27:950-953. [DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-007984] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/16/2018] [Accepted: 09/17/2018] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
|
35
|
Koo MM, von Wagner C, Abel GA, McPhail S, Hamilton W, Rubin GP, Lyratzopoulos G. The nature and frequency of abdominal symptoms in cancer patients and their associations with time to help-seeking: evidence from a national audit of cancer diagnosis. J Public Health (Oxf) 2018; 40:e388-e395. [PMID: 29385513 PMCID: PMC6166582 DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdx188] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2017] [Revised: 12/18/2017] [Accepted: 12/22/2017] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Raising awareness of possible cancer symptoms is important for timely help-seeking; recent campaigns have focused on symptom groups (such as abdominal symptoms) rather than individual alarm symptoms associated with particular cancer sites. The evidence base supporting such initiatives is still emerging however; understanding the frequency and nature of presenting abdominal symptoms among cancer patients could inform the design and evaluation of public health awareness campaigns. Methods We examined eight presenting abdominal symptoms (abdominal pain, change in bowel habit, bloating/distension, dyspepsia, rectal bleeding, dysphagia, reflux and nausea/vomiting) among 15 956 patients subsequently diagnosed with cancer in England. We investigated the cancer site case-mix and variation in the patient interval (symptom-onset-to-presentation) by abdominal symptom. Results Almost a quarter (23%) of cancer patients presented with abdominal symptoms before being diagnosed with one of 27 common and rarer cancers. The patient interval varied substantially by abdominal symptom: median (IQR) intervals ranged from 7 (0-28) days for abdominal pain to 30 (4-73) days for dysphagia. This variation persisted after adjusting for age, sex and ethnicity (P < 0.001). Conclusions Abdominal symptoms are common at presentation among cancer patients, while time to presentation varies by symptom. The need for awareness campaigns may be greater for symptoms associated with longer intervals to help-seeking.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke’s Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, UK
| | - Sean McPhail
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England Zone A, 2nd Floor, Skipton House, 80 London Road, London, UK
| | - William Hamilton
- University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke’s Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, UK
| | - Greg P Rubin
- Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Sir James Spence Institute, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
36
|
Salika T, Abel GA, Mendonca SC, von Wagner C, Renzi C, Herbert A, McPhail S, Lyratzopoulos G. Associations between diagnostic pathways and care experience in colorectal cancer: evidence from patient-reported data. Frontline Gastroenterol 2018; 9:241-248. [PMID: 30046429 PMCID: PMC6056077 DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2017-100926] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2017] [Revised: 02/03/2018] [Accepted: 02/24/2018] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To examine how different pathways to diagnosis of colorectal cancer may be associated with the experience of subsequent care. DESIGN Patient survey linked to information on diagnostic route.English patients with colorectal cancer (analysis sample n=6837) who responded to a patient survey soon after their hospital treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Odds Ratios and adjusted proportions of negative evaluation of key aspects of care for colorectal cancer, including the experience of shared decision-making about treatment, specialist nursing and care coordination, by diagnostic route (ie, screening detection, emergency presentation, urgent and elective general practitioner referral). RESULTS For 14 of 18 questions, there was evidence (p≤0.02) for variation in patient experience by diagnostic route, with 6-31 percentage point differences between routes in adjusted proportions of negative experience. Emergency presenters were more likely to report a negative experience for most questions, including those about adequacy of information about their diagnosis and sufficient explanation before operations. Screen-detected patients were least likely to report negative experiences except for support from primary care. Patients diagnosed through elective primary care referrals were most likely to report worse experience for questions for which overall variation by route was generally small. CONCLUSIONS Screening-detected patients tend to report the best and emergency presenters the worst experience of subsequent care. Improvement efforts can target care integration for screening-detected patients and provision of information about the diagnosis and treatment of emergency presenters.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Theodosia Salika
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Exeter, UK
| | - Silvia C Mendonca
- The Health Improvement Studies (THIS) Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Christian von Wagner
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, UK
| | - Cristina Renzi
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Annie Herbert
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
- The Health Improvement Studies (THIS) Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Harshfield A, Abel GA, Barclay S, Payne RA. Do GPs accurately record date of death? A UK observational analysis. BMJ Support Palliat Care 2018; 10:e24. [PMID: 29950293 DOI: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2018-001514] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2018] [Revised: 04/17/2018] [Accepted: 06/06/2018] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To examine the concordance between dates of death recorded in UK primary care and national mortality records. METHODS UK primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink were linked to Office for National Statistics (ONS) data, for 118 571 patients who died between September 2010 and September 2015. Logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with discrepancy in death dates between data sets. RESULTS Death dates matched in 76.8% of cases with primary care dates preceding ONS date in 2.9%, and following in 20.3% of cases; 92.2% of cases differed by <2 weeks. Primary care date was >4 weeks later than ONS in 1.5% of cases and occurred more frequently with deaths categorised as 'external' (15.8% vs 0.8% for cancer), and in younger patients (15.9% vs 1% for 18-29 and 80-89 years, respectively). General practices with the greatest discrepancies (97.5th percentile) had around 200 times higher odds of recording substantially discordant dates than practices with the lowest discrepancies (2.5th percentile). CONCLUSION Dates of death in primary care records often disagree with national records and should be treated with caution. There is marked variation between practices, and studies involving young patients, unexplained deaths and where precise date of death is important are particularly vulnerable to these issues.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amelia Harshfield
- Primary Care Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.,RAND Europe, Cambridge, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- Primary Care, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | | | - Rupert A Payne
- Centre for Academic Primary Care, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Paddison CAM, Abel GA, Burt J, Campbell JL, Elliott MN, Lattimer V, Roland M. What happens to patient experience when you want to see a doctor and you get to speak to a nurse? Observational study using data from the English General Practice Patient Survey. BMJ Open 2018; 8:e018690. [PMID: 29431131 PMCID: PMC5829817 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018690] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2017] [Revised: 11/30/2017] [Accepted: 12/19/2017] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To examine patient consultation preferences for seeing or speaking to a general practitioner (GP) or nurse; to estimate associations between patient-reported experiences and the type of consultation patients actually received (phone or face-to-face, GP or nurse). DESIGN Secondary analysis of data from the 2013 to 2014 General Practice Patient Survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS 870 085 patients from 8005 English general practices. OUTCOMES Patient ratings of communication and 'trust and confidence' with the clinician they saw. RESULTS 77.7% of patients reported wanting to see or speak to a GP, while 14.5% reported asking to see or speak to a nurse the last time they tried to make an appointment (weighted percentages). Being unable to see or speak to the practitioner type of the patients' choice was associated with lower ratings of trust and confidence and patient-rated communication. Smaller differences were found if patients wanted a face-to-face consultation and received a phone consultation instead. The greatest difference was for patients who asked to see a GP and instead spoke to a nurse for whom the adjusted mean difference in confidence and trust compared with those who wanted to see a nurse and did see a nurse was -15.8 points (95% CI -17.6 to -14.0) for confidence and trust in the practitioner and -10.5 points (95% CI -11.7 to -9.3) for net communication score, both on a 0-100 scale. CONCLUSIONS Patients' evaluation of their care is worse if they do not receive the type of consultation they expect, especially if they prefer a doctor but are unable to see one. New models of care should consider the potential unintended consequences for patient experience of the widespread introduction of multidisciplinary teams in general practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Jenni Burt
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Primary Care Unit, Institute of Public Health, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | | | | | - Valerie Lattimer
- School of Health Sciences, Norwich Research Park, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
| | - Martin Roland
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Primary Care Unit, Institute of Public Health, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Barclay ME, Lyratzopoulos G, Greenberg DC, Abel GA. Missing data and chance variation in public reporting of cancer stage at diagnosis: Cross-sectional analysis of population-based data in England. Cancer Epidemiol 2018; 52:28-42. [PMID: 29175263 PMCID: PMC5786666 DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2017.11.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2017] [Revised: 11/09/2017] [Accepted: 11/11/2017] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The percentage of cancer patients diagnosed at an early stage is reported publicly for geographically-defined populations corresponding to healthcare commissioning organisations in England, and linked to pay-for-performance targets. Given that stage is incompletely recorded, we investigated the extent to which this indicator reflects underlying organisational differences rather than differences in stage completeness and chance variation. METHODS We used population-based data on patients diagnosed with one of ten cancer sites in 2013 (bladder, breast, colorectal, endometrial, lung, ovarian, prostate, renal, NHL, and melanoma). We assessed the degree of bias in CCG (Clinical Commissioning Group) indicators introduced by missing-is-late and complete-case specifications compared with an imputed 'gold standard'. We estimated the Spearman-Brown (organisation-level) reliability of the complete-case specification. We assessed probable misclassification rates against current pay-for-performance targets. RESULTS Under the missing-is-late approach, bias in estimated CCG percentage of tumours diagnosed at an early stage ranged from -2 to -30 percentage points, while bias under the complete-case approach ranged from -2 to +7 percentage points. Using an annual reporting period, indicators based on the least biased complete-case approach would have poor reliability, misclassifying 27/209 (13%) CCGs against a pay-for-performance target in current use; only half (53%) of CCGs apparently exceeding the target would be correctly classified in terms of their underlying performance. CONCLUSIONS Current public reporting schemes for cancer stage at diagnosis in England should use a complete-case specification (i.e. the number of staged cases forming the denominator) and be based on three-year reporting periods. Early stage indicators for the studied geographies should not be used in pay-for-performance schemes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew E Barclay
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, United Kingdom; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, Victoria House, Capital Park, Fulbourn, Cambridge, CB21 5XA, United Kingdom
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, United Kingdom; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, Victoria House, Capital Park, Fulbourn, Cambridge, CB21 5XA, United Kingdom; Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, WC1E 7HB, United Kingdom.
| | - David C Greenberg
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, United Kingdom; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, Victoria House, Capital Park, Fulbourn, Cambridge, CB21 5XA, United Kingdom
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Smeall Building, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Zhou Y, Mendonca SC, Abel GA, Hamilton W, Walter FM, Johnson S, Shelton J, Elliss-Brookes L, McPhail S, Lyratzopoulos G. Variation in 'fast-track' referrals for suspected cancer by patient characteristic and cancer diagnosis: evidence from 670 000 patients with cancers of 35 different sites. Br J Cancer 2018; 118:24-31. [PMID: 29182609 PMCID: PMC5765227 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2017.381] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2017] [Revised: 09/16/2017] [Accepted: 09/26/2017] [Indexed: 01/23/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In England, 'fast-track' (also known as 'two-week wait') general practitioner referrals for suspected cancer in symptomatic patients are used to shorten diagnostic intervals and are supported by clinical guidelines. However, the use of the fast-track pathway may vary for different patient groups. METHODS We examined data from 669 220 patients with 35 cancers diagnosed in 2006-2010 following either fast-track or 'routine' primary-to-secondary care referrals using 'Routes to Diagnosis' data. We estimated the proportion of fast-track referrals by sociodemographic characteristic and cancer site and used logistic regression to estimate respective crude and adjusted odds ratios. We additionally explored whether sociodemographic associations varied by cancer. RESULTS There were large variations in the odds of fast-track referral by cancer (P<0.001). Patients with testicular and breast cancer were most likely to have been diagnosed after a fast-track referral (adjusted odds ratios 2.73 and 2.35, respectively, using rectal cancer as reference); whereas patients with brain cancer and leukaemias least likely (adjusted odds ratios 0.05 and 0.09, respectively, for brain cancer and acute myeloid leukaemia). There were sex, age and deprivation differences in the odds of fast-track referral (P<0.013) that varied in their size and direction for patients with different cancers (P<0.001). For example, fast-track referrals were least likely in younger women with endometrial cancer and in older men with testicular cancer. CONCLUSIONS Fast-track referrals are less likely for cancers characterised by nonspecific presenting symptoms and patients belonging to low cancer incidence demographic groups. Interventions beyond clinical guidelines for 'alarm' symptoms are needed to improve diagnostic timeliness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Y Zhou
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, 2 Wort’s Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - S C Mendonca
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, 2 Wort’s Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - G A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Smeall Building, St Luke’s Campus, Exeter EX1 2LU, UK
| | - W Hamilton
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Smeall Building, St Luke’s Campus, Exeter EX1 2LU, UK
| | - F M Walter
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, 2 Wort’s Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - S Johnson
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England Zone A, 2nd Floor, Skipton House, 80 London Road, London SE1 6LH, UK
| | - J Shelton
- Cancer Research UK, Angel Building 407 St John Street, London EC1V 4AD, UK
| | - L Elliss-Brookes
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England Zone A, 2nd Floor, Skipton House, 80 London Road, London SE1 6LH, UK
| | - S McPhail
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England Zone A, 2nd Floor, Skipton House, 80 London Road, London SE1 6LH, UK
| | - G Lyratzopoulos
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, 2 Wort’s Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England Zone A, 2nd Floor, Skipton House, 80 London Road, London SE1 6LH, UK
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 7HB, UK
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Lyratzopoulos G, Mendonca SC, Gildea C, McPhail S, Peake MD, Rubin G, Singh H, Hamilton W, Walter FM, Roland M, Abel GA. Associations between diagnostic activity and measures of patient experience in primary care: a cross-sectional ecological study of English general practices. Br J Gen Pract 2018; 68:e9-e17. [PMID: 29255108 PMCID: PMC5737322 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp17x694097] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2017] [Accepted: 07/27/2017] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lower use of endoscopies and urgent referrals for suspected cancer has been linked to poorer outcomes for patients with cancer; it is important to examine potential predictors of variable use. AIM To examine the associations between general practice measures of patient experience and practice use of endoscopies or urgent referrals for suspected cancer. DESIGN AND SETTING Cross-sectional ecological analysis in English general practices. METHOD Data were taken from the GP Patient Survey and the Cancer Services Public Health Profiles. After adjustment for practice population characteristics, practice-level associations were examined between the use of endoscopy and urgent referrals for suspected cancer, and the ability to book an appointment (used as proxy for ease of access), the ability to see a preferred doctor (used as proxy for relational continuity), and doctor/nurse communication skills. RESULTS Taking into account practice scores for the ability to book an appointment, practices rated higher for the proxy measure of relational continuity used urgent referrals and endoscopies less often (for example, 30% lower urgent referral and 15% lower gastroscopy rates between practices in the 90th/10th centiles, respectively). In contrast, practices rated higher for doctor communication skills used urgent referrals and endoscopies more often (for example, 26% higher urgent referral and 17% higher gastroscopy rates between practices in the 90th/10th centiles, respectively). Patients with cancer in practices that were rated higher for doctor communication skills were less likely to be diagnosed as emergencies (1.7% lower between practices in the 90th than in the 10th centile). CONCLUSION Practices where patients rated doctor communication highly were more likely to investigate and refer patients urgently but, in contrast, practices where patients could see their preferred doctor more readily were less likely to do so. This article discusses the possible implications of these findings for clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK; Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Silvia C Mendonca
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Carolynn Gildea
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Services, Public Health England, London, UK
| | - Sean McPhail
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Services, Public Health England, London, UK
| | - Michael D Peake
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Services, Public Health England, London, UK; Institute for Lung Health, Department of Respiratory Medicine, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Greg Rubin
- Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, UK
| | - Hardeep Singh
- Houston Veterans Affairs Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center and the Section of Health Services Research, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, US
| | | | | | - Martin Roland
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
42
|
Swann R, McPhail S, Witt J, Shand B, Abel GA, Hiom S, Rashbass J, Lyratzopoulos G, Rubin G. Diagnosing cancer in primary care: results from the National Cancer Diagnosis Audit. Br J Gen Pract 2018; 68:e63-e72. [PMID: 29255111 PMCID: PMC5737321 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp17x694169] [Citation(s) in RCA: 98] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2017] [Accepted: 10/17/2017] [Indexed: 11/01/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Continual improvements in diagnostic processes are needed to minimise the proportion of patients with cancer who experience diagnostic delays. Clinical audit is a means of achieving this. AIM To characterise key aspects of the diagnostic process for cancer and to generate baseline measures for future re-audit. DESIGN AND SETTING Clinical audit of cancer diagnosis in general practices in England. METHOD Information on patient and tumour characteristics held in the English National Cancer Registry was supplemented by information from GPs in participating practices. Data items included diagnostic timepoints, patient characteristics, and clinical management. RESULTS Data were collected on 17 042 patients with a new diagnosis of cancer during 2014 from 439 practices. Participating practices were similar to non-participating ones, particularly regarding population age, urban/rural location, and practice-based patient experience measures. The median diagnostic interval for all patients was 40 days (interquartile range [IQR] 15-86 days). Most patients were referred promptly (median primary care interval 5 days [IQR 0-27 days]). Where GPs deemed diagnostic delays to have occurred (22% of cases), patient, clinician, or system factors were responsible in 26%, 28%, and 34% of instances, respectively. Safety netting was recorded for 44% of patients. At least one primary care-led investigation was carried out for 45% of patients. Most patients (76%) had at least one existing comorbid condition; 21% had three or more. CONCLUSION The findings identify avenues for quality improvement activity and provide a baseline for future audit of the impact of 2015 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance on management and referral of suspected cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruth Swann
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London, and Cancer Research UK, London
| | - Sean McPhail
- National Disease Registration, National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London
| | | | - Brian Shand
- National Disease Registration, National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London
| | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Clinical School, University of Exeter, Exeter
| | - Sara Hiom
- Early Diagnosis and Cancer Intelligence, Cancer Research UK, London
| | - Jem Rashbass
- National Disease Registration, National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England, London
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England; Epidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcome Group, University College London, London; Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge
| | - Greg Rubin
- Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle; National Cancer Diagnosis Audit Steering Group, Cancer Research UK, London
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Saunders CL, Meads C, Abel GA, Lyratzopoulos G. Associations Between Sexual Orientation and Overall and Site-Specific Diagnosis of Cancer: Evidence From Two National Patient Surveys in England. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35:3654-3661. [PMID: 28945501 PMCID: PMC5855217 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2017.72.5465] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose To address gaps in evidence on the risk of cancer in people from sexual minorities. Patients and Methods We used data from 796,594 population-based English General Practice Patient Survey responders to explore the prevalence of self-reported diagnoses of cancer in the last 5 years among sexual minorities compared with heterosexual women and men. We analyzed data from 249,010 hospital-based English Cancer Patient Experience Survey responders with sexual orientation as a binary outcome, and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth, Revision, diagnosis as covariate-38 different common and rarer cancers, with breast and prostate cancer as baseline categories for women and men, respectively-to examine whether people from sexual minorities are over- or under-represented among different cancer sites. For both analyses, we used logistic regression, stratified by sex and adjusted for age. Results A diagnosis of cancer in the past 5 years was more commonly reported by male General Practice Patient Survey responders who endorsed gay or bisexual orientation compared with heterosexual men (odds ratio [OR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.49; P < .001) without evidence of a difference between lesbian or bisexual compared with heterosexual women (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.37; P = .19). For most common and rarer cancer sites (30 of 33 in women, 28 of 32 in men), the odds of specific cancer site diagnosis among Cancer Patient Experience Survey respondents seemed to be independent of sexual orientation; however, there were notable differences in infection-related (HIV and human papillomavirus [HPV]) cancers. Gay or bisexual men were over-represented among men with Kaposi's sarcoma (OR, 48.2; 95% CI, 22.0 to 105.6), anal (OR, 15.5; 95% CI, 11.0 to 21.9), and penile cancer (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.9 to 3.7). Lesbian or bisexual women were over-represented among women with oropharyngeal cancer (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.7 to 6.0). Conclusion Large-scale evidence indicates that the distribution of cancer sites does not vary substantially by sexual orientation, with the exception of some HPV- and HIV-associated cancers. These findings highlight the importance of HPV vaccination in heterosexual and sexual minority populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Catherine L. Saunders
- Catherine L. Saunders and Georgios Lyratzopoulos, Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge; Catherine Meads, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge; Gary A. Abel, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter; and Georgios Lyratzopoulos University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Catherine Meads
- Catherine L. Saunders and Georgios Lyratzopoulos, Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge; Catherine Meads, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge; Gary A. Abel, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter; and Georgios Lyratzopoulos University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Gary A. Abel
- Catherine L. Saunders and Georgios Lyratzopoulos, Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge; Catherine Meads, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge; Gary A. Abel, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter; and Georgios Lyratzopoulos University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Catherine L. Saunders and Georgios Lyratzopoulos, Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge; Catherine Meads, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge; Gary A. Abel, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter; and Georgios Lyratzopoulos University College London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Koo MM, von Wagner C, Abel GA, McPhail S, Rubin GP, Lyratzopoulos G. Typical and atypical presenting symptoms of breast cancer and their associations with diagnostic intervals: Evidence from a national audit of cancer diagnosis. Cancer Epidemiol 2017; 48:140-146. [PMID: 28549339 PMCID: PMC5482318 DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2017.04.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 64] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2017] [Revised: 04/08/2017] [Accepted: 04/18/2017] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Most symptomatic women with breast cancer have relatively short diagnostic intervals but a substantial minority experience prolonged journeys to diagnosis. Atypical presentations (with symptoms other than breast lump) may be responsible. METHODS We examined the presenting symptoms of breast cancer in women using data from a national audit initiative (n=2316). Symptoms were categorised topographically. We investigated variation in the length of the patient interval (time from symptom onset to presentation) and the primary care interval (time from presentation to specialist referral) across symptom groups using descriptive analyses and quantile regression. RESULTS A total of 56 presenting symptoms were described: breast lump was the most frequent (83%) followed by non-lump breast symptoms, (e.g. nipple abnormalities (7%) and breast pain (6%)); and non-breast symptoms (e.g. back pain (1%) and weight loss (0.3%)). Greater proportions of women with 'non-lump only' and 'both lump and non-lump' symptoms waited 90days or longer before seeking help compared to those with 'breast lump only' (15% and 20% vs. 7% respectively). Quantile regression indicated that the differences in the patient interval persisted after adjusting for age and ethnicity, but there was little variation in primary care interval for the majority of women. CONCLUSIONS About 1 in 6 women with breast cancer present with a large spectrum of symptoms other than breast lump. Women who present with non-lump breast symptoms tend to delay seeking help. Further emphasis of breast symptoms other than breast lump in symptom awareness campaigns is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter EX1 2LU, UK
| | - Sean McPhail
- University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England Zone A, 2nd Floor, Skipton House, 80 London Road, London SE1 6LH, UK
| | - Greg P Rubin
- School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Durham University, Stockton on Tees TS17 6BH, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK; National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England Zone A, 2nd Floor, Skipton House, 80 London Road, London SE1 6LH, UK; Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0SR, UK
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Abel GA, Mendonca SC, McPhail S, Zhou Y, Elliss-Brookes L, Lyratzopoulos G. Emergency diagnosis of cancer and previous general practice consultations: insights from linked patient survey data. Br J Gen Pract 2017; 67:e377-e387. [PMID: 28438775 PMCID: PMC5442953 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp17x690869] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2016] [Accepted: 01/12/2017] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Emergency diagnosis of cancer is common and aetiologically complex. The proportion of emergency presenters who have consulted previously with relevant symptoms is uncertain. AIM To examine how many patients with cancer, who were diagnosed as emergencies, have had previous primary care consultations with relevant symptoms; and among those, to examine how many had multiple consultations. DESIGN AND SETTING Secondary analysis of patient survey data from the 2010 English Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES), previously linked to population-based data on diagnostic route. METHOD For emergency presenters with 18 different cancers, associations were examined for two outcomes (prior GP consultation status; and 'three or more consultations' among prior consultees) using logistic regression. RESULTS Among 4647 emergency presenters, 1349 (29%) reported no prior consultations, being more common in males (32% versus 25% in females, P<0.001), older (44% in ≥85 versus 30% in 65-74-year-olds, P<0.001), and the most deprived (35% versus 25% least deprived, P = 0.001) patients; and highest/lowest for patients with brain cancer (46%) and mesothelioma (13%), respectively (P<0.001 for overall variation by cancer site). Among 3298 emergency presenters with prior consultations, 1356 (41%) had three or more consultations, which were more likely in females (P<0.001), younger (P<0.001), and non-white patients (P = 0.017) and those with multiple myeloma, and least likely for patients with leukaemia (P<0.001). CONCLUSION Contrary to suggestions that emergency presentations represent missed diagnoses, about one-third of emergency presenters (particularly those in older and more deprived groups) have no prior GP consultations. Furthermore, only about one-third report multiple (three or more) consultations, which are more likely in 'harder-to-suspect' groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School (Primary Care), Exeter and Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge
| | - Silvia C Mendonca
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge
| | - Sean McPhail
- Public Health England National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, London
| | - Yin Zhou
- Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge
| | - Lucy Elliss-Brookes
- Public Health England National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, London
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London and Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Fletcher E, Abel GA, Anderson R, Richards SH, Salisbury C, Dean SG, Sansom A, Warren FC, Campbell JL. Quitting patient care and career break intentions among general practitioners in South West England: findings of a census survey of general practitioners. BMJ Open 2017; 7:e015853. [PMID: 28446528 PMCID: PMC5719652 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015853] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2017] [Revised: 03/09/2017] [Accepted: 03/10/2017] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Given recent concerns regarding general practitioner (GP) workforce capacity, we aimed to describe GPs' career intentions, especially those which might impact on GP workforce availability over the next 5 years. DESIGN Census survey, conducted between April and June 2016 using postal and online responses , of all GPs on the National Health Service performers list and eligible to practise in primary care. Two reminders were used as necessary. SETTING South West England (population 3.5 million), a region with low overall socioeconomic deprivation. PARTICIPANTS Eligible GPs were 2248 out of 3370 (67 % response rate). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Reported likelihood of permanently leaving or reducing hours spent in direct patient care or of taking a career break within the next 5 years and present morale weighted for non-response. RESULTS Responders included 217 7 GPs engaged in patient care. Of these, 863 (37% weighted, 95% CI 35 % to 39 %) reported a high likelihood of quitting direct patient care within the next 5 years. Overall, 1535 (70% weighted, 95% CI 68 % to 72 %) respondents reported a career intention that would negatively impact GP workforce capacity over the next 5 years, through permanently leaving or reducing hours spent in direct patient care, or through taking a career break. GP age was an important predictor of career intentions; sharp increases in the proportion of GPs intending to quit patient care were evident from 52 years. Only 305 (14% weighted, 95% CI 13 % to 16 %) reported high morale, while 1195 ( 54 % weighted, 95% CI 52 % to 56 %) reported low morale. Low morale was particularly common among GP partners. Current morale strongly predicted GPs' career intentions; those with very low morale were particularly likely to report intentions to quit patient care or to take a career break. CONCLUSIONS A substantial majority of GPs in South West England report low morale. Many are considering career intentions which, if implemented, would adversely impact GP workforce capacity within a short time period. STUDY REGISTRATION NIHR HS&DR - 14/196/02, UKCRN ID 20700.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emily Fletcher
- Primary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- Primary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Rob Anderson
- Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Suzanne H Richards
- Primary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Chris Salisbury
- Centre for Academic Primary Care, NIHR School for Primary Care Research, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Sarah Gerard Dean
- Psychology Applied to Rehabilitation and Health, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Anna Sansom
- Primary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Fiona C Warren
- Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - John L Campbell
- Primary Care Research Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Zhou Y, Abel GA, Hamilton W, Pritchard-Jones K, Gross CP, Walter FM, Renzi C, Johnson S, McPhail S, Elliss-Brookes L, Lyratzopoulos G. Diagnosis of cancer as an emergency: a critical review of current evidence. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2017; 14:45-56. [PMID: 27725680 DOI: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.155] [Citation(s) in RCA: 111] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
Many patients with cancer are diagnosed through an emergency presentation, which is associated with inferior clinical and patient-reported outcomes compared with those of patients who are diagnosed electively or through screening. Reducing the proportion of patients with cancer who are diagnosed as emergencies is, therefore, desirable; however, the optimal means of achieving this aim are uncertain owing to the involvement of different tumour, patient and health-care factors, often in combination. Most relevant evidence relates to patients with colorectal or lung cancer in a few economically developed countries, and defines emergency presentations contextually (that is, whether patients presented to emergency health-care services and/or received emergency treatment shortly before their diagnosis) as opposed to clinically (whether patients presented with life-threatening manifestations of their cancer). Consistent inequalities in the risk of emergency presentations by patient characteristics and cancer type have been described, but limited evidence is available on whether, and how, such presentations can be prevented. Evidence on patients' symptoms and health-care use before presentation as an emergency is sparse. In this Review, we describe the extent, causes and implications of a diagnosis of cancer following an emergency presentation, and provide recommendations for public health and health-care interventions, and research efforts aimed at addressing this under-researched aspect of cancer diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yin Zhou
- The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0SR, UK
| | - Gary A Abel
- The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0SR, UK
- University of Exeter, College House, St Luke's Campus, Exeter EX2 4TE, UK
| | - Willie Hamilton
- University of Exeter, College House, St Luke's Campus, Exeter EX2 4TE, UK
| | - Kathy Pritchard-Jones
- Institute of Child Health, University College London, 30 Guilford Street, London WC1N 1EH, UK
- University College London Partners Academic Health Science Network, 170 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7HA, UK
| | - Cary P Gross
- Section of General Medicine, Cancer Outcomes Public Policy and Effectiveness Research (COPPER) Center, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut 06519, USA
| | - Fiona M Walter
- The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0SR, UK
| | - Cristina Renzi
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London WC1E 7HB, UK
| | - Sam Johnson
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England Zone A, 2nd Floor, Skipton House, 80 London Road, London SE1 6LH, UK
| | - Sean McPhail
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England Zone A, 2nd Floor, Skipton House, 80 London Road, London SE1 6LH, UK
| | - Lucy Elliss-Brookes
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England Zone A, 2nd Floor, Skipton House, 80 London Road, London SE1 6LH, UK
| | - Georgios Lyratzopoulos
- The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0SR, UK
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London WC1E 7HB, UK
- National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, Public Health England Zone A, 2nd Floor, Skipton House, 80 London Road, London SE1 6LH, UK
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Abel GA, Barclay ME, Payne RA. Adjusted indices of multiple deprivation to enable comparisons within and between constituent countries of the UK including an illustration using mortality rates. BMJ Open 2016; 6:e012750. [PMID: 27852716 PMCID: PMC5128942 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012750] [Citation(s) in RCA: 88] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Social determinants can have a major impact on health and as a consequence substantial inequalities are seen between and within countries. The study of inequalities between countries relies on having accurate and consistent measures of deprivation across the country borders. However, in the UK most socioeconomic deprivation measures are not comparable between countries. We give a method of adjusting the Indices of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) for use across the UK, describe the deprivation of each UK country, and show the problems introduced by naïvely using country-specific deprivation measures in a UK-wide analysis of mortality rates. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS 42 148 geographic areas covering the population of the UK. OUTCOME MEASURES Adjusted IMD scores based on the income and employment domains of country-specific IMD scores, adjusting for the contribution of other domains. The mortality rate among people aged under 75 years standardised to the UK age structure was compared between country-specific and UK-adjusted IMD quintiles. RESULTS Of the constituent countries of the UK, Northern Ireland was the most deprived with 37% of the population living in areas in the most deprived fifth of the UK, followed by Wales with 22% of the population living in the most deprived fifth of the UK. England and Scotland had similar levels of deprivation. Deprivation-specific mortality rates were similar in England and Wales. Northern Ireland had lower mortality rates than England for each deprivation group, with similar differences for each group. Scotland had higher mortality rates than England for each deprivation group, with larger differences for more deprived groups. CONCLUSIONS Analyses of between-country and within-country inequalities by socioeconomic position should use consistent measures; failing to use consistent measures may give misleading results. The published adjusted IMD scores we describe allow consistent analysis across the UK.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gary A Abel
- University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
- Primary Care Unit, Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK
| | - Matthew E Barclay
- Primary Care Unit, Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK
| | - Rupert A Payne
- Primary Care Unit, Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK
- Centre for Academic Primary Care, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Walter FM, Mills K, Mendonça SC, Abel GA, Basu B, Carroll N, Ballard S, Lancaster J, Hamilton W, Rubin GP, Emery JD. Symptoms and patient factors associated with diagnostic intervals for pancreatic cancer (SYMPTOM pancreatic study): a prospective cohort study. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 1:298-306. [PMID: 28404200 PMCID: PMC6358142 DOI: 10.1016/s2468-1253(16)30079-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 93] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2016] [Revised: 07/27/2016] [Accepted: 08/08/2016] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Background Pancreatic cancer is the tenth most common cancer in the UK; however, outcomes are poor, in part due to late diagnosis. We aimed to identify symptoms and other clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with pancreatic cancer diagnosis and diagnostic intervals. Methods We did this prospective cohort study at seven hospitals in two regions in England. We recruited participants aged 40 years or older who were referred for suspicion of pancreatic cancer. Data were collected by use of a patient questionnaire and primary care and hospital records. Descriptive and regression analyses were done to examine associations between symptoms and patient factors with the total diagnostic interval (time from onset of the first symptom to the date of diagnosis), comprising patient interval (time from first symptom to first presentation) and health system interval (time from first presentation to diagnosis). Findings We recruited 391 participants between Jan 1, 2011, and Dec 31, 2014 (24% response rate). 119 (30%) participants were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer (41 [34%] had metastatic disease), 47 (12%) with other cancers, and 225 (58%) with no cancer. 212 (54%) patients had multiple first symptoms whereas 161 (41%) patients had a solitary first symptom. In this referred population, no initial symptoms were reported more frequently by patients with cancer than by those with no cancer. Several subsequent symptoms predicted pancreatic cancer: jaundice (51 [49%] of 105 patients with pancreatic cancer vs 25 [12%] of 211 patients with no cancer; p<0·0001), fatigue (48/95 [51%] vs 40/155 [26%]; p=0·0001), change in bowel habit (36/87 [41%] vs 28/175 [16%]; p<0·0001), weight loss (55/100 [55%] vs 41/184 [22%]; p<0·0001), and decreased appetite (41/86 [48%] vs 41/156 [26%]; p=0·0011). There was no difference in any interval between patients with pancreatic cancer and those with no cancer (total diagnostic interval: median 117 days [IQR 57–234] vs 131 days [IQR 66–284]; p=0·32; patient interval 18 days [0–37] vs 15 days [1–62]; p=0·22; health system interval 76 days [28–161] vs 79 days [30–156]; p=0·68). Total diagnostic intervals were shorter when jaundice (hazard ratio [HR] 1·38, 95% CI 1·07–1·78; p=0·013) and decreased appetite (1·42, 1·11–1·82; p=0·0058) were reported as symptoms, and longer in patients presenting with indigestion (0·71, 0·56–0·89; p=0·0033), back pain (0·77, 0·59–0·99; p=0·040), diabetes (0·71, 0·52–0·97; p=0·029), and self-reported anxiety or depression, or both (0·67, 0·49–0·91; p=0·011). Health system intervals were likewise longer with indigestion (0·74, 0·58–0·95; p=0·0018), back pain (0·76, 0·58–0·99; p=0·044), diabetes (0·63, 0·45–0·89; p=0·0082), and self-reported anxiety or depression, or both (0·63, 0·46–0·88; p=0·0064), but were shorter with male sex (1·41, 1·1–1·81; p=0·0072) and decreased appetite (1·56, 1·19–2·06; p=0·0015). Weight loss was associated with longer patient intervals (HR 0·69, 95% CI 0·54–0·89; p=0·0047). Interpretation Although we identified no initial symptoms that differentiated people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer from those without pancreatic cancer, key additional symptoms might signal the disease. Health-care professionals should be vigilant to the possibility of pancreatic cancer in patients with evolving gastrointestinal and systemic symptoms, particularly in those with diabetes or mental health comorbidities. Funding National Institute for Health Research and Pancreatic Cancer Action.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fiona M Walter
- University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
| | | | | | - Gary A Abel
- University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Bristi Basu
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Nick Carroll
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | | | | | | | | | - Jon D Emery
- University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Walter FM, Emery JD, Mendonca S, Hall N, Morris HC, Mills K, Dobson C, Bankhead C, Johnson M, Abel GA, Rutter MD, Hamilton W, Rubin GP. Symptoms and patient factors associated with longer time to diagnosis for colorectal cancer: results from a prospective cohort study. Br J Cancer 2016; 115:533-41. [PMID: 27490803 PMCID: PMC4997546 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2016.221] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2016] [Revised: 06/20/2016] [Accepted: 06/28/2016] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: The objective of this study is to investigate symptoms, clinical factors and socio-demographic factors associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis and time to diagnosis. Methods: Prospective cohort study of participants referred for suspicion of CRC in two English regions. Data were collected using a patient questionnaire, primary care and hospital records. Descriptive and regression analyses examined associations between symptoms and patient factors with total diagnostic interval (TDI), patient interval (PI), health system interval (HSI) and stage. Results: A total of 2677 (22%) participants responded; after exclusions, 2507 remained. Participants were diagnosed with CRC (6.1%, 56% late stage), other cancers (2.0%) or no cancer (91.9%). Half the cohort had a solitary first symptom (1332, 53.1%); multiple first symptoms were common. In this referred population, rectal bleeding was the only initial symptom more frequent among cancer than non-cancer cases (34.2% vs 23.9%, P=0.004). There was no evidence of differences in TDI, PI or HSI for those with cancer vs non-cancer diagnoses (median TDI CRC 124 vs non-cancer 138 days, P=0.142). First symptoms associated with shorter TDIs were rectal bleeding, change in bowel habit, ‘feeling different' and fatigue/tiredness. Anxiety, depression and gastro-intestinal co-morbidities were associated with longer HSIs and TDIs. Symptom duration-dependent effects were found for rectal bleeding and change in bowel habit. Conclusions: Doctors and patients respond less promptly to some symptoms of CRC than others. Healthcare professionals should be vigilant to the possibility of CRC in patients with relevant symptoms and mental health or gastro-intestinal comorbidities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fiona M Walter
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK.,Department of General Practice, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Jon D Emery
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK.,Department of General Practice, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Silvia Mendonca
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Nicola Hall
- School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Durham University, Stockton on Tees TS17 6BH, UK
| | - Helen C Morris
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Katie Mills
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Christina Dobson
- School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Durham University, Stockton on Tees TS17 6BH, UK
| | - Clare Bankhead
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6GG, UK
| | | | - Gary A Abel
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK
| | - Matthew D Rutter
- School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Durham University, Stockton on Tees TS17 6BH, UK.,University Hospital of North Tees, Stockton on Tees TS19 8PE, UK
| | - William Hamilton
- College House, St Luke's Campus, University of Exeter, Exeter EX2 4TE, UK
| | - Greg P Rubin
- School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Durham University, Stockton on Tees TS17 6BH, UK
| |
Collapse
|