Pre-referral general practitioner consultations and subsequent experience of cancer care: evidence from the English Cancer Patient Experience Survey.

Prolonged diagnostic intervals may negatively affect the patient experience of subsequent cancer care, but evidence about this assertion is sparse. We analysed data from 73 462 respondents to two English Cancer Patient Experience Surveys to examine whether patients with three or more (3+) pre-referral consultations were more likely to report negative experiences of subsequent care compared with patients with one or two consultations in respect of 12 a priori selected survey questions. For each of 12 experience items, logistic regression models were used, adjusting for prior consultation category, cancer site, socio-demographic case-mix and response tendency (to capture potential variation in critical response tendencies between individuals). There was strong evidence (P < 0.01 for all) that patients with 3+ pre-referral consultations reported worse care experience for 10/12 questions, with adjusted odds ratios compared with patients with 1-2 consultations ranging from 1.10 (95% confidence intervals 1.03-1.17) to 1.68 (1.60-1.77), or between +1.8% and +10.6% greater percentage reporting a negative experience. Associations were stronger for processes involving primary as opposed to hospital care; and for evaluation than report items. Considering 1, 2, 3-4 and '5+' pre-referral consultations separately a 'dose-response' relationship was apparent. We conclude that there is a negative association between multiple pre-diagnostic consultations with a general practitioner and the experience of subsequent cancer care.GL is supported by a Cancer Research UK Clinician Scientist Fellowship (A18180). JW is supported by Cancer Research UK Programme Grant C1418/A14134.This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Wiley via http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ecc.1235

Pre-referral general practitioner consultations and subsequent experience of cancer care: evidence from the English Cancer Patient Experience Survey

Prolonged diagnostic intervals may negatively affect the patient experience of subsequent cancer care, but evidence about this assertion is sparse. We analysed data from 73 462 respondents to two English Cancer Patient Experience Surveys to examine whether patients with three or more (3+) pre-referral consultations were more likely to report negative experiences of subsequent care compared with patients with one or two consultations in respect of 12 a priori selected survey questions. For each of 12 experience items, logistic regression models were used, adjusting for prior consultation category, cancer site, socio-demographic case-mix and response tendency (to capture potential variation in critical response tendencies between individuals). There was strong evidence (P < 0.01 for all) that patients with 3+ pre-referral consultations reported worse care experience for 10/12 questions, with adjusted odds ratios compared with patients with 1-2 consultations ranging from 1.10 (95% confidence intervals 1.03-1.17) to 1.68 (1.60-1.77), or between +1.8% and +10.6% greater percentage reporting a negative experience. Associations were stronger for processes involving primary as opposed to hospital care; and for evaluation than report items. Considering 1, 2, 3-4 and '5+' pre-referral consultations separately a 'dose-response' relationship was apparent. We conclude that there is a negative association between multiple pre-diagnostic consultations with a general practitioner and the experience of subsequent cancer care

Pre-referral general practitioner consultations and subsequent experience of cancer care: Evidence from the English Cancer Patient Experience Survey

This is the final version. Available from the publisher via the DOI in this recordProlonged diagnostic intervals may negatively affect the patient experience of subsequent cancer care, but evidence about this assertion is sparse. We analysed data from 73 462 respondents to two English Cancer Patient Experience Surveys to examine whether patients with three or more (3+) pre-referral consultations were more likely to report negative experiences of subsequent care compared with patients with one or two consultations in respect of 12 a priori selected survey questions. For each of 12 experience items, logistic regression models were used, adjusting for prior consultation category, cancer site, socio-demographic case-mix and response tendency (to capture potential variation in critical response tendencies between individuals). There was strong evidence (P < 0.01 for all) that patients with 3+ pre-referral consultations reported worse care experience for 10/12 questions, with adjusted odds ratios compared with patients with 1-2 consultations ranging from 1.10 (95% confidence intervals 1.03-1.17) to 1.68 (1.60-1.77), or between +1.8% and +10.6% greater percentage reporting a negative experience. Associations were stronger for processes involving primary as opposed to hospital care; and for evaluation than report items. Considering 1, 2, 3-4 and '5+' pre-referral consultations separately a 'dose-response' relationship was apparent. We conclude that there is a negative association between multiple pre-diagnostic consultations with a general practitioner and the experience of subsequent cancer care.Cancer Research UKCancer Research U

Development and validation of the Cambridge Multimorbidity Score

BACKGROUND: Health services have failed to respond to the pressures of multimorbidity. Improved measures of multimorbidity are needed for conducting research, planning services and allocating resources. METHODS: We modelled the association between 37 morbidities and 3 key outcomes (primary care consultations, unplanned hospital admission, death) at 1 and 5 years. We extracted development (n = 300 000) and validation (n = 150 000) samples from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We constructed a general-outcome multimorbidity score by averaging the standardized weights of the separate outcome scores. We compared performance with the Charlson Comorbidity Index. RESULTS: Models that included all 37 conditions were acceptable predictors of general practitioner consultations (C-index 0.732, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.731-0.734), unplanned hospital admission (C-index 0.742, 95% CI 0.737-0.747) and death at 1 year (C-index 0.912, 95% CI 0.905-0.918). Models reduced to the 20 conditions with the greatest combined prevalence/weight showed similar predictive ability (C-indices 0.727, 95% CI 0.725-0.728; 0.738, 95% CI 0.732-0.743; and 0.910, 95% CI 0.904-0.917, respectively). They also predicted 5-year outcomes similarly for consultations and death (C-indices 0.735, 95% CI 0.734-0.736, and 0.889, 95% CI 0.885-0.892, respectively) but performed less well for admissions (C-index 0.708, 95% CI 0.705-0.712). The performance of the general-outcome score was similar to that of the outcome-specific models. These models performed significantly better than those based on the Charlson Comorbidity Index for consultations (C-index 0.691, 95% CI 0.690-0.693) and admissions (C-index 0.703, 95% CI 0.697-0.709) and similarly for mortality (C-index 0.907, 95% CI 0.900-0.914). INTERPRETATION: The Cambridge Multimorbidity Score is robust and can be either tailored or not tailored to specific health outcomes. It will be valuable to those planning clinical services, policymakers allocating resources and researchers seeking to account for the effect of multimorbidity

Do healthcare professionals and young adults know about the National Chlamydia Screening Programme? Findings from two cross-sectional surveys

The extent to which healthcare professionals (HCPs) and young people (YP) are aware of, and adhere to, National Chlamydia Screening Programme (NCSP) recommendations on testing frequency is unclear. To address this two cross-sectional surveys in 2015-2016: one among genitourinary medicine (GUM) and non-GUM HCPs (n = 109) and the other among YP attending a GUM clinic in England (n = 195). For both, questions were designed to measure awareness of NCSP guidance and whether respondents acted on that knowledge. This included questions about YP's most recent test(s) (if ever) and the time since first and last sex with their most recent partners. Knowledge of NCSP testing guidelines varied among both GUM and non-GUM HCP respondents. However, lack of knowledge of the guidelines did not preclude HCPs from recommending testing in line with NCSP recommendations in practice. While most YP were not aware of NCSP recommendations, around two-thirds had tested for Chlamydia at least once in the last year. However, testing seldom appeared to coincide with partnership change. There is a knowledge gap and a discord between testing recommendations and practice. Interventions are needed to encourage appropriate testing patterns to maximise the individual and public health benefits of testing

Is chlamydia screening and testing in Britain reaching young adults at risk of infection? Findings from the third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3)

In the context of widespread opportunistic chlamydia screening among young adults, we aimed to quantify chlamydia testing and diagnosis among 16-24 year olds in Britain in relation to risk factors for prevalent chlamydia infection

An RxLR effector from phytophthora infestans prevents re-localisation of two plant NAC transcription factors from the endoplasmic reticulum to the nucleus

The plant immune system is activated following the perception of exposed, essential and invariant microbial molecules that are recognised as non-self. A major component of plant immunity is the transcriptional induction of genes involved in a wide array of defence responses. In turn, adapted pathogens deliver effector proteins that act either inside or outside plant cells to manipulate host processes, often through their direct action on plant protein targets. To date, few effectors have been shown to directly manipulate transcriptional regulators of plant defence. Moreover, little is known generally about the modes of action of effectors from filamentous (fungal and oomycete) plant pathogens. We describe an effector, called Pi03192, from the late blight pathogen Phytophthora infestans, which interacts with a pair of host transcription factors at the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) inside plant cells. We show that these transcription factors are released from the ER to enter the nucleus, following pathogen perception, and are important in restricting disease. Pi03192 prevents the plant transcription factors from accumulating in the host nucleus, revealing a novel means of enhancing host susceptibility

An organization‐ and category‐level comparison of diagnostic requirements for mental disorders in ICD‐11 and DSM‐5

In 2013, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) published the 5th edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM‐5). In 2019, the World Health Assembly approved the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD‐11). It has often been suggested that the field would benefit from a single, unified classification of mental disorders, although the priorities and constituencies of the two sponsoring organizations are quite different. During the development of the ICD‐11 and DSM‐5, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the APA made efforts toward harmonizing the two systems, including the appointment of an ICD‐DSM Harmonization Group. This paper evaluates the success of these harmonization efforts and provides a guide for practitioners, researchers and policy makers describing the differences between the two systems at both the organizational and the disorder level. The organization of the two classifications of mental disorders is substantially similar. There are nineteen ICD‐11 disorder categories that do not appear in DSM‐5, and seven DSM‐5 disorder categories that do not appear in the ICD‐11. We compared the Essential Features section of the ICD‐11 Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines (CDDG) with the DSM‐5 criteria sets for 103 diagnostic entities that appear in both systems. We rated 20 disorders (19.4%) as having major differences, 42 disorders (40.8%) as having minor definitional differences, 10 disorders (9.7%) as having minor differences due to greater degree of specification in DSM‐5, and 31 disorders (30.1%) as essentially identical. Detailed descriptions of the major differences and some of the most important minor differences, with their rationale and related evidence, are provided. The ICD and DSM are now closer than at any time since the ICD‐8 and DSM‐II. Differences are largely based on the differing priorities and uses of the two diagnostic systems and on differing interpretations of the evidence. Substantively divergent approaches allow for empirical comparisons of validity and utility and can contribute to advances in the field

Emergency percutaneous needle decompression for tension pneumoperitoneum

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Tension pneumoperitoneum as a complication of iatrogenic bowel perforation during endoscopy is a dramatic condition in which intraperitoneal air under pressure causes hemodynamic and ventilatory compromise. Like tension pneumothorax, urgent intervention is required. Immediate surgical decompression though is not always possible due to the limitations of the preclinical management and sometimes to capacity constraints of medical staff and equipment in the clinic.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This is a retrospective analysis of cases of pneumoperitoneum and tension pneumoperitoneum due to iatrogenic bowel perforation. All patients admitted to our surgical department between January 2005 and October 2010 were included. Tension pneumoperitoneum was diagnosed in those patients presenting signs of hemodynamic and ventilatory compromise in addition to abdominal distension.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Between January 2005 and October 2010 eleven patients with iatrogenic bowel perforation were admitted to our surgical department. The mean time between perforation and admission was 36 ± 14 hrs (range 30 min - 130 hrs), between ER admission and begin of the operation 3 hrs and 15 min ± 47 min (range 60 min - 9 hrs). Three out of eleven patients had clinical signs of tension pneumoperitoneum. In those patients emergency percutaneous needle decompression was performed with a 16G venous catheter. This improved significantly the patients' condition (stabilization of vital signs, reducing jugular vein congestion), bridging the time to the start of the operation.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Hemodynamical and respiratory compromise in addition to abdominal distension shortly after endoscopy are strongly suggestive of tension pneumoperitoneum due to iatrogenic bowel perforation. This is a rare but life threatening condition and it can be managed in a preclinical and clinical setting with emergency percutaneous needle decompression like tension pneumothorax. Emergency percutaneous decompression is no definitive treatment, only a method to bridge the time gap to definitive surgical repair.</p