Embedding electronic decision-support tools for suspected cancer in primary care: a qualitative study of GPs' experiences

Aim: The purpose of this evaluation was to obtain views from general practitioners (GPs) who piloted the electronic risk assessment tools (eRATs) for suspected lung or colorectal cancer. We wanted to find out whether GPs were able to integrate these tools into their everyday practice. We were also keen to identify facilitators and barriers to their more widespread use. Background: Cancer remains one of UK’s biggest health problems, in terms of morbidity and mortality. Comparative European data show that five-year survival figures for many cancers are lower in the United Kingdom than in comparable European countries. eRATs are intended to aid recognition of symptoms of lung and colorectal cancers in patients aged 40 years and over. Methods: This was a qualitative study; telephone interviews were conducted with 23 GPs who piloted the eRATs. A systematic qualitative analysis was applied to the data. The normalisation process model was used after data collection. This theory-driven conceptual framework was used to examine the operationalisation of this intervention in Primary Care. Findings: Electronic decision-support tools appear to be useful additions to the resources available to GPs in order to assist them with recognizing potential cancer symptoms. However, the tools need to be refined in order to integrate them into GP practice. The tools raised GPs’ awareness about cancer because of the prompt facility of the software, although this also raised the potential of ‘prompt fatigue’. GPs constantly receive alerts via their clinical system, particularly related to the Quality and Outcomes Framework. The integration of eRATs into routine practice could be engendered by improvement to the training packages that accompany them, and by its delivery via a platform compatible with all GP clinical systems

A qualitative exploration of women's perspectives and acceptability of including new cancer awareness information in all‐clear breast or cervical screening results

Objective: This study explored women's perspectives on the acceptability of including new cancer information with an all-clear breast or cervical screening result letter (using ovarian cancer as a case study). Methods: In 2016, six focus group discussions were conducted with women aged 25–70 years old, eligible for invitation to the NHS breast or cervical screening programme and resident in England. The focus groups lasted 60–90 min and were held in community venues. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Thirty-eight women aged 25–67 years old participated in the focus groups. Data analysis yielded six descriptive themes: general cancer awareness, taking advantage of a ‘teachable moment’, a double-edge sword, barriers to accepting and using new cancer information, motivators for accepting and using new cancer information and wider strategies to increase cancer awareness in women. Women welcomed the inclusion of new cancer information in all-clear screening results but highlighted pertinent lessons to be considered to maximise the usefulness of the approach. Conclusion: While women perceived this approach as acceptable, it is pertinent to note the potential of the new cancer information to stimulate anxiety and potentially widen inequalities by excluding non-attenders at screening programmes. Specific complementary and tailored approaches are necessary to mitigate these limitations

Creating and supporting clinical academic careers in the NHS

Aim of the Poster: To provide an overview of three distinct but related activities in the East Midlands region to support the development of Clinical Academic Careers in Nursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professions

Using primary care-based paper and telephone interventions to increase uptake of bowel scope screening in Yorkshire: A protocol of a randomised controlled trial

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. Introduction Evidence suggests bowel scope screening (BSS) can significantly reduce an individual's risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC). BSS for 55 year olds was therefore introduced to the English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) in 2013. However, the benefits are only gained from test completion and uptake is low (43%). Primary care involvement has consistently shown benefits to cancer screening uptake and so this study aims to build on this knowledge and evaluate general practitioner (GP) practice led interventions designed to increase BSS attendance. Methods and analysis A three-arm randomised controlled trial will be conducted to evaluate three interventions: one intervention for prospective BSS invitees (primer letter with locally tailored leaflet sent by an individual's GP practice) and two interventions for those who do not attend their BSS appointment (a self-referral letter sent by an individual's GP practice and a patient navigation call made on behalf of an individual's GP practice). The trial will be set in Yorkshire. Individuals soon to receive their invitation to attend BSS at one of the Hull and East Yorkshire Bowel Cancer Screening centre sites, will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: control (usual care; no input from GP practice), Intervention group A (primer letter/leaflet and a self-referral letter), Intervention group B (primer letter/leaflet and a patient navigation call). Attendance data will be obtained from the BCSP database (via National Health Service (NHS) Digital) 3 months after the last intervention. Regression analysis will compare uptake, and additional clinical outcomes, across the three groups. The analysis will be multivariate and adjust for several covariates including gender and area-level deprivation. Ethics and dissemination NHS ethical approval has been obtained from London-Harrow Research Ethics Committee. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences. Trial registration number ISRCTN16252122; Pre-results

The Grizzly, February 10, 1997

Medical Ethicist to Speak on Campus • Gender Studies May Replace Women\u27s Studies • ECBA Candidate Speaks on Technology • Opinion: Code of Silence?; What I Think II; Politics Gone Wild; Big Brenneman is Watching, but not Paying Attention • Spirit of Life Ensemble Performs for Diversity Week • Mass Media and Society Brings Internet to the Classroom • Gymnastics Team Wins Second Straight Meet • Women Hoopsters Go 1-1 for the Week • Ursinus Men\u27s Basketball Team Downed at Pallestra • UC Wrestlers Split with Elizabethtown and Nationally Ranked Lycoming • Swimming Team Suffers Two Losseshttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/grizzlynews/1396/thumbnail.jp

Eating In Time, Eating Up Time

London, U

The Grizzly, April 7, 1997

Airband Sets Its New Fundraising Record • Ursinus Students Participate in Model U.N. • Women\u27s Health Discussed in Merck Lecture • Changes for Summer Classes • Letters: Letter of Thanks; Faculty Member Remembered • Opinion: Seminar on Post-Abortion Trauma • Pfahler Observatory Open House for Hale-Bopp Viewing • Something for Everyone in proTheatre Production of The Two Noble Kinsmen • Another Look at the Ursinus Gymnastics Team • The Dangers of Halogen Lamps • Men\u27s Tennis Wins • Courtney Named an All-American • Trecroce Named Player of the Week • Women\u27s Tennis Action • Women\u27s Lacrosse Falls to Middlebury • Softball Drops 3 in a Row • Dickinson Rallies to Take Two From the Bearshttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/grizzlynews/1401/thumbnail.jp

The Grizzly, November 18, 1996

Bears Beat Dickinson, Make NCAA Playoffs • Security and RLO Work Through Changes • Opinion: Question of Security; An Insider Throwing out a Line; One of Four Seasons; It\u27s All in Your Head • Concert and Jazz Bands to Perform • Jude: Hardy\u27s Novel Arrives in the Flesh • Bears Win Conference Championship To Make NCAA Playoffs!!! • Getz and Finnegan Receive Post-Season Honorshttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/grizzlynews/1392/thumbnail.jp

The Grizzly, November 25, 1996

Honors Pilot Program a Success • Pass-Fail Forum Set for Dec. 4 • Opinion: What About Easter?; It Hurts; Jesus is Dead?; Thanksgiving; Is Ursinus a Disposable Society?; Never-Never Land • Final Exam Schedule • Bears Suffer 31-24 Defeat in NCAA Playoffs • Men\u27s Basketball Opens with an Overtime Win • Bears Place Nine On All-Conference Team • Wrestling Opens with Two Winshttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/grizzlynews/1393/thumbnail.jp