1. |
- Harris, Michael, et al.
(författare)
-
Primary care practitioners' diagnostic action when the patient may have cancer : an exploratory vignette study in 20 European countries
- 2020
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 10:10, s. 035678-035678
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVES: Cancer survival rates vary widely between European countries, with differences in timeliness of diagnosis thought to be one key reason. There is little evidence on the way in which different healthcare systems influence primary care practitioners' (PCPs) referral decisions in patients who could have cancer.This study aimed to explore PCPs' diagnostic actions (whether or not they perform a key diagnostic test and/or refer to a specialist) in patients with symptoms that could be due to cancer and how they vary across European countries. DESIGN: A primary care survey. PCPs were given vignettes describing patients with symptoms that could indicate cancer and asked how they would manage these patients. The likelihood of taking immediate diagnostic action (a diagnostic test and/or referral) in the different participating countries was analysed. Comparisons between the likelihood of taking immediate diagnostic action and physician characteristics were calculated. SETTING: Centres in 20 European countries with widely varying cancer survival rates. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2086 PCPs answered the survey question, with a median of 72 PCPs per country. RESULTS: PCPs' likelihood of immediate diagnostic action at the first consultation varied from 50% to 82% between countries. PCPs who were more experienced were more likely to take immediate diagnostic action than their peers. CONCLUSION: When given vignettes of patients with a low but significant possibility of cancer, more than half of PCPs across Europe would take diagnostic action, most often by ordering diagnostic tests. However, there are substantial between-country variations.
|
|
2. |
- Murchie, Peter, et al.
(författare)
-
Influences of rurality on action to diagnose cancer by primary care practitioners : Results from a Europe-wide survey in 20 countries
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Cancer Epidemiology. - : Elsevier. - 1877-7821 .- 1877-783X. ; 65, s. 1-6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Rural-dwellers have poorer cancer outcomes than urban counterparts, for reasons which are unclear. At healthcare institution level, poorer access to investigations and different clinical decision-making by rural primary healthcare practitioners (PCPs) could be important. Aim: To compare access to investigations, attitudes to cancer diagnosis and clinical decision-making between rural and urban PCPs. Setting: A vignette-based cross-sectional survey of rural and urban PCPs in 20 European countries. Methods: Data on PCPs' decision-making and attitudes to cancer diagnosis were based on clinical scenarios. Comparisons were made using tests of proportion, univariable and multivariable binary logistic regression. Results: Of the 1779 PCPs completing the survey 541 30.4 %) practiced rurally. Rural PCPs had significantly less direct access to all investigative modalities: ultrasound; endoscopy; x-ray and advanced screening (all p<0.001). Rural PCPs were as likely as urban PCPs to take diagnostic action (investigation and/or referral) at the index consultation in all four clinical vignettes ((OR, 95 % CI) for lung: 0.90, 0.72-1.12; ovarian: 0.95, 0.75-1.19; breast: 0.87, 0.69-1.09; colorectal: 0.98, 0.75-1.30). Rural PCPs were less likely to refer to a specialist at the index consultation for ovarian cancer (OR 0.71 95 % CI 0.51-0.99). Rural PCPs were significantly more likely to report that their patients faced barriers to accessing specialist care, but practitioners did not report greater difficulties making specialist referral than their urban counterparts Conclusions: European rural PCPs report poorer access to investigations but are at least as likely as urban PCPs to investigate or refer patients that might have cancer at the index consultation.
|
|
3. |
- Thulesius, Hans, et al.
(författare)
-
Pluralistic retasking. Re-thinking cancer diagnostics from a primary care physician perspective. A grounded theory study.
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Core values of family medicine: Threats and opportunities. - : WONCA.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundCancer diagnostics is heterogeneous depending on disease type, age, gender, socioeconomical and geographical contexts of patients and caregivers.QuestionsHow could cancer be diagnosed in a more timely way from a primary care perspective?MethodsData from 1752 primary care physician (PCP) respondents in 20 countries and 20 Spanish and 7 Swedish PCP interviewees 2013-2019 analysed with classic grounded theory, especially free text responses to “How do you think the speed of diagnosis of cancer in primary care could be improved?”. Secondary analysis of interviews and literature. OutcomesWe call PCP's ideas on improved cancer work-up pluralistic retasking: task shifting among physicians, nurses, assistants and secretaries involving task redistribution, task sharing, task collaboration, changing tasks – cancer fast tracks or cancer screening instead of cancer case finding when appropriate. Cognitive retasking involves both slow rational thinking in algorithms and fast intuitive thinking through gut feelings. Digital retasking bridges time and place by eHealth to reduce “elsewhereism” of experts and power symmetry issues between patient/caregiver. Shrinking gaps between and amongst patients and caregivers requires care restructuring and reallocation of funds. Care refinancing is thus necessary to improve diagnostic timeliness. Good cancer diagnostics needs good time management. Not too early (to avoid overdiagnosis) and never too late.DiscussionPluralistic retasking is a conceptual summary of multiple strategies needed to optimise the timeliness of cancer diagnostics.Take Home Message for PracticeCan I do something differently to diagnose cancer in a more timely way?
|
|