General practitioner characteristics and delay in cancer diagnosis. a population-based cohort study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Delay in cancer diagnosis may have serious prognostic consequences, and some patients experience delays lasting several months. However, we have no knowledge whether such delays are associated with general practitioner (GP) characteristics. The aim of the present study was to analyse whether GP and practice characteristics are associated with the length of delay in cancer diagnosis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study was designed as a population-based cohort study. The setting was the County of Aarhus, Denmark (640,000 inhabitants). Participants include 334 GPs and their 1,525 consecutive, newly diagnosed cancer patients. During one year (September 2004 to August 2005), patients with incident cancer were enrolled from administrative registries. GPs completed questionnaires on the patients' diagnostic pathways and on GP and practice characteristics. Delay was categorised as patient-related (more than 60 days), doctor-related (more than 30 days) and system-related (more than 90 days). The associations between delay and characteristics were assessed in a logistic regression model using odds ratios (ORs).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>No GP characteristics (seniority, practice organization, list size, participation in continuing medical education, job satisfaction and level of burnout) were associated with doctor delay. Patients of female GPs more often had a short <it>patient delay </it>than patients of male GPs (OR 0.44, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) 0.28 to 0.71). Patients whose GPs provided many services (OR 0.66, 95%CI 0.44 to 0.95) and patients attending GPs with little former knowledge of their patients (OR 0.68, 95%CI 0.47 to 0.99) more often experienced a short <it>system delay </it>than patients attending GPs with less activity and more knowledge of their patients. Patients listed with a female GP more often experienced a long system delay than patients of male GPs (OR 1.50, 95%CI 1.02 to 2.21). Finally, patients with low GP-reported compliance more often experienced a long system delay (OR 1.73, 95%CI 1.07 to 2.80) than patients with higher compliance.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>GP characteristics were not statistically significantly associated with doctor delay. However, some GP characteristics were associated with patient and system delay, which indicates that these factors may be important for understanding patient delay (e.g. perceived GP accessibility and the GP-patient relationship) and system delay (e.g. the GP's experience and opportunities for referring and coordinating diagnostic work-up).</p

Time to diagnosis and mortality in colorectal cancer: a cohort study in primary care

PublishedJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tBACKGROUND: The relationship between the diagnostic interval and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC) is unclear. This association was examined by taking account of important confounding factors at the time of first presentation of symptoms in primary care. METHODS: A total of 268 patients with CRC were included in a prospective, population-based study in a Danish county. The diagnostic interval was defined as the time from first presentation of symptoms until diagnosis. We analysed patients separately according to the general practitioner's interpretation of symptoms. Logistic regression was used to estimate 3-year mortality odds ratios as a function of the diagnostic interval using restricted cubic splines and adjusting for tumour site, comorbidity, age, and sex. RESULTS: In patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of cancer or any other serious illness, the risk of dying within 3 years decreased with diagnostic intervals up to 5 weeks and then increased (P=0.002). In patients presenting with vague symptoms, the association was reverse, although not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Detecting cancer in primary care is two sided: aimed at expediting ill patients while preventing healthy people from going to hospital. This likely explains the counterintuitive findings; but it does not explain the increasing mortality with longer diagnostic intervals. Thus, this study provides evidence for the hypothesis that the length of the diagnostic interval affects mortality in CRC patients.The study was supported by grants from the Danish Cancer Society, the Novo Nordic Foundation, the Danish Graduate School in Public Health Science, and Aarhus University

Defining frequent attendance in general practice

Background: General practitioners (GPs) or researchers sometimes need to identify frequent attenders (FAs) in order to screen them for unidentified problems and to test specific interventions. We wanted to assess different methods for selecting FAs to identify the most feasible and effective one for use in a general (group) practice. Methods: In the second Dutch National Survey of General Practice, data were collected on 375 899 persons registered with 104 practices. Frequent attendance is defined as the top 3% and 10% of enlisted patients in each one-year age-sex group measured during the study year. We used these two selections as our reference standard. We also selected the top 3% and 10% FAs (90 and 97 percentile) based on four selection methods of diminishing preciseness. We compared the test characteristics of these four methods. Results: Of all enlisted patients, 24 % did not consult the practice during the study year. The mean number of contacts in the top 10% FAs increased in men from 5.8 (age 15-24 years) to 17.5 (age 64-75 years) and in women from 9.7 to 19.8. In the top 3% of FAs, contacts increased in men from 9.2 to 24.5 and in women from 14 to 27.8. The selection of FAs becomes more precise when smaller age classes are used. All selection methods show acceptable results (kappa 0.849 - 0.942) except the three group method. Conclusion: To correctly identify frequent attenders in general practice, we recommend dividing patients into at least three age groups per se

Survival of patients with small cell lung cancer undergoing lung resection in England, 1998–2009

Introduction: Chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy is the recommended treatment for small cell lung cancer (SCLC), except in stage I disease where clinical guidelines state there may be a role for surgery based on favourable outcomes in case series. Evidence supporting adjuvant chemotherapy in resected SCLC is limited but this is widely offered. Methods: Data on 359 873 patients who were diagnosed with a first primary lung cancer in England between 1998 and 2009 were grouped according to histology (SCLC or non-SCLC (NSCLC)) and whether they underwent a surgical resection. We explored their survival using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression, adjusting for age, sex, comorbidity and socioeconomic status. Results: The survival of 465 patients with resected SCLC was lower than patients with resected NSCLC (5-year survival 31% and 45%, respectively), but much higher than patients of either group who were not resected (3%). The difference between resected SCLC and NSCLC diminished with time after surgery. Survival was superior for the subgroup of 198 'elective' SCLC cases where the diagnosis was most likely known before resection than for the subgroup of 267 'incidental' cases where the SCLC diagnosis was likely to have been made after resection. Conclusions: These data serve as a natural experiment testing the survival after surgical management of SCLC according to NSCLC principles. Patients with SCLC treated surgically for early stage disease may have survival outcomes that approach those of NSCLC, supporting the emerging clinical practice of offering surgical resection to selected patients with SCLC

General practitioners' experience and benefits from patient evaluations

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>It has now for many years been recognised that patient evaluations should be undertaken as an integral part of the complex task of improving the quality of general practice care. Yet little is known about the general practitioners' (GPs') benefit from patient evaluations. Aim 1 was to study the impact on the GPs of a patient evaluation and subsequent feedback of results presented at a plenary session comprising a study guide for the results and group discussions. Aim 2 was to study possible facilitators and barriers to the implementations of the results raised by the patient evaluation process.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A patient evaluation survey of 597 voluntarily participating GPs was performed by means of the EUROPEP questionnaire. Evaluation results were fed back to the GPs as written reports at a single feedback meeting with group discussions of the results. Between 3 and 17 months after the feedback, the 597 GPs received a questionnaire with items addressing their experience with and perceived benefit from the evaluations.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>79.4% of the GPs responded. 33% of the responding GPs reported that the patient evaluation had raised their attention to the patient perspective on the quality of general practice care. Job satisfaction had improved among 26%, and 21% had developed a more positive attitude to patient evaluations. 77% of the GPs reported having learnt from the evaluation. 54% had made changes to improve practice, 82% would recommend a patient evaluation to a colleague and 75% would do another patient evaluation if invited. 14% of the GPs had become less positive towards patient evaluations, and job satisfaction had decreased among 3%.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We found a significant impact on the GPs regarding satisfaction with the process and attitude towards patient evaluations, GPs' attention to the patients' perspective on care quality and their job satisfaction. Being benchmarked against the average seemed to raise barriers to the concept of patient evaluations and difficulties interpreting the results may have formed a barrier to their implementation which was partly overcome by adding qualitative data to the quantitative results. The GPs' significant willingness to share and discuss the results with others may have served as a facilitator.</p

Routes to diagnosis and the association with the prognosis in patients with cancer – A nationwide register-based cohort study in Denmark

Background: The prognosis of cancer is related to how the cancer is identified, and where in the healthcare system the patient presents, i.e. routes to diagnosis (RtD). We aimed to describe the RtD for patients diagnosed with cancer in Denmark by using routinely collected register-based data and to investigate the association between RtD and prognosis measured as one-year all-cause mortality. / Methods: We conducted a population-based national cohort study by linking routinely collected Danish registry data. We categorised each patient into one of eight specified RtD based on an algorithm using a stepwise logic decision process. We described the proportions of patients with cancer diagnosed by different RtD. We examined associations between RtD and one-year all-cause mortality using logistic regression models adjusting for sex, age, cancer type, year of diagnosis, region of residence, and comorbidity. / Results: We included 144,635 cancers diagnosed in 139,023 patients in 2014–2017. The most common RtD were cancer patient pathway from primary care (45.9 %), cancer patient pathway from secondary care (20.0 %), unplanned hospital admission (15.8 %), and population-based screening (7.5 %). The one-year mortality ranged from 1.4 % in screened patients to 53.0 % in patients diagnosed through unplanned hospital admission. Patients with an unplanned admission were more likely to die within the first year after diagnosis (OR = 3.38 (95 %CI: 3.24–3.52)) compared to patients diagnosed through the cancer patient pathway from primary care. / Conclusion: The majority of cancer patients were diagnosed through a cancer patient pathway. The RtD were associated with the prognosis, and the prognosis was worst in patients diagnosed through unplanned admission. The study suggests that linking routinely collected registry data could enable a national framework for RtD, which could serve to identify variations across patient-, health-, and system-related and healthcare factors. This information could be used in future research investigating markers for monitoring purposes

Educational differences in likelihood of attributing breast symptoms to cancer: a vignette-based study

BACKGROUND: Stage at diagnosis of breast cancer varies by socio-economic status (SES), with lower SES associated with poorer survival. We investigated associations between SES (indexed by education), and the likelihood of attributing breast symptoms to breast cancer. METHOD: We conducted an online survey with 961 women (47-92 years) with variable educational levels. Two vignettes depicted familiar and unfamiliar breast changes (axillary lump and nipple rash). Without making breast cancer explicit, women were asked 'What do you think this […..] could be?' After the attribution question, women were asked to indicate their level of agreement with a cancer avoidance statement ('I would not want to know if I have breast cancer'). RESULTS: Women were more likely to mention cancer as a possible cause of an axillary lump (64%) compared with nipple rash (30%). In multivariable analysis, low and mid education were independently associated with being less likely to attribute a nipple rash to cancer (OR 0.51, 0.36-0.73 and OR 0.55, 0.40-0.77, respectively). For axillary lump, low education was associated with lower likelihood of mentioning cancer as a possible cause (OR 0.58, 0.41-0.83). Although cancer avoidance was also associated with lower education, the association between education and lower likelihood of making a cancer attribution was independent. CONCLUSION: Lower education was associated with lower likelihood of making cancer attributions for both symptoms, also after adjustment for cancer avoidance. Lower likelihood of considering cancer may delay symptomatic presentation and contribute to educational differences in stage at diagnosis.This study was funded by Cancer Research UK Early Diagnosis Advisory Group grant (C33872/A18555). GL is supported by a Cancer Research UK Advanced Clinician Scientist Fellowship (A18180)

Assessing how routes to diagnosis vary by the age of patients with cancer: a nationwide register-based cohort study in Denmark

BACKGROUND: Older patients with cancer have poorer prognosis compared to younger patients. Moreover, prognosis is related to how cancer is identified, and where in the healthcare system patients present, i.e. routes to diagnosis (RtD). We investigated whether RtD varied by patients' age. METHODS: This population-based national cohort study used Danish registry data. Patients were categorized into age groups and eight mutually exclusive RtD. We employed multinomial logistic regressions adjusted for sex, region, diagnosis year, cohabitation, education, income, immigration status and comorbidities. Screened and non-screened patients were analysed separately. RESULTS: The study included 137,876 patients. Both younger and older patients with cancer were less likely to get diagnosed after a cancer patient pathways referral from primary care physician compared to middle-aged patients. Older patients were more likely to get diagnosed via unplanned admission, death certificate only, and outpatient admission compared to younger patients. The patterns were similar across comorbidity levels. CONCLUSIONS: RtD varied by age groups, and middle-aged patients were the most likely to get diagnosed after cancer patient pathways with referral from primary care. Emphasis should be put on raising clinicians' awareness of cancer being the underlying cause of symptoms in both younger patients and in older patients

Agreement between questionnaires and registry data on routes to diagnosis and milestone dates of the cancer diagnostic pathway

BACKGROUND The routes to diagnosis and the time intervals along the diagnostic pathway affect cancer outcomes. Some data on routes to diagnosis and milestone dates can be extracted from registries or databases. When this data is incomplete, inaccurate or non-existing, other data sources are needed. This study investigates the agreement between multiple data sources on routes to diagnosis and milestone dates of cancer pathway. METHODS Information on routes to diagnosis and milestone dates were compared across four data sources (cancer patients, general practitioners, cancer specialists and registries) for breast, colorectal, lung and ovarian cancers across the UK, Scandinavia, Canada and Australia. Agreement on routes to diagnosis and milestone dates was assessed by Kappa and AC1 coefficients and Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). RESULTS 4502 patients were included in the analysis of routes to diagnosis. The agreement was almost perfect (kappa = 0.15–0.88, AC1 = 0.86–0.91) for breast cancer, substantial to almost perfect (kappa = 0.07–0.86, AC1 = 0.74–0.93) for colorectal and ovarian cancers, and substantial (kappa = 0.09–0.11, AC1 = 0.65–0.74) for lung cancer. 2287 patients were included in the analysis of milestone dates. The agreement was adequate for all cancer types (CCC = 0.88–0.99); highest agreement was seen for date of diagnosis (CCC = 0.94–0.99). CONCLUSION We found a reasonable agreement between patient/physician questionnaires and registry data for routes to diagnosis and milestone dates. The agreement on routes to diagnosis was generally higher for breast cancer than for colorectal, ovarian and lung cancers. Lower agreement was seen on date of first presentation to primary care and date of treatment initiation compared to date of diagnosis