Revisiting Cancer Diagnosis in Scotland: Further Insights from the Second Scottish National Cancer Diagnosis Audit

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES European Journal of Cancer Care Pub Date : 2024-02-14 DOI:10.1155/2024/1117968
Susanne Maxwell, Mary Kynn, David Weller, Lesley Anderson, Peter Murchie
{"title":"Revisiting Cancer Diagnosis in Scotland: Further Insights from the Second Scottish National Cancer Diagnosis Audit","authors":"Susanne Maxwell,&nbsp;Mary Kynn,&nbsp;David Weller,&nbsp;Lesley Anderson,&nbsp;Peter Murchie","doi":"10.1155/2024/1117968","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><i>Objective</i>. To characterise cancer diagnosis in Scottish primary care in 2018/19 and draw comparisons with diagnostic activity in 2014. <i>Methods</i>. A national audit of cancer diagnosis undertaken in Scottish general practices. Participating GPs collected diagnostic pathway data on patients diagnosed with cancer in 2018/19 from medical records. These data were supplemented by linkage to the Scottish Cancer Registry and previous audit data from 2014. Analyses explored and compared patient demographics, presentation, diagnostic routes, and intervals. <i>Results</i>. Seventy-three practices submitted data on 2,014 cases in 2014 and 90 practices submitted data on 2,318 cases in 2018/2019. Individual demographics and types of cancer were similar. There was a higher proportion of USC (urgent suspected cancer) referrals in 2019 than 2014 (42.9% vs 38.1%, <i>p</i> = 0.008) but a similar proportion of emergency presentations (19.2% vs 20.4%). Primary care (median 4 (IQR 0–22) vs 5 (0–23)) and diagnostic intervals (27 (10–59) vs 30 (13–68)) were similar in both periods. Significantly fewer (24.5% vs 28.3, <i>p</i> = 0.015) had a diagnostic interval &gt;60 days in 2019 than 2014. Harder to diagnose cancers were more likely to present as emergencies and be subject to prolonged delays in both cohorts. <i>Conclusions</i>. The 2014 and 2018/19 cohorts were broadly similar. There is limited evidence that USC use had increased between 2014 and 2018/19. Harder to diagnose cancers are still most likely to present as emergencies and be subject to delays. Overall, it seems there were small improvements in cancer diagnosis prepandemic and a further audit could examine evidence for a postpandemic recovery.</p>","PeriodicalId":11953,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Cancer Care","volume":"2024 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Cancer Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/1117968","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective. To characterise cancer diagnosis in Scottish primary care in 2018/19 and draw comparisons with diagnostic activity in 2014. Methods. A national audit of cancer diagnosis undertaken in Scottish general practices. Participating GPs collected diagnostic pathway data on patients diagnosed with cancer in 2018/19 from medical records. These data were supplemented by linkage to the Scottish Cancer Registry and previous audit data from 2014. Analyses explored and compared patient demographics, presentation, diagnostic routes, and intervals. Results. Seventy-three practices submitted data on 2,014 cases in 2014 and 90 practices submitted data on 2,318 cases in 2018/2019. Individual demographics and types of cancer were similar. There was a higher proportion of USC (urgent suspected cancer) referrals in 2019 than 2014 (42.9% vs 38.1%, p = 0.008) but a similar proportion of emergency presentations (19.2% vs 20.4%). Primary care (median 4 (IQR 0–22) vs 5 (0–23)) and diagnostic intervals (27 (10–59) vs 30 (13–68)) were similar in both periods. Significantly fewer (24.5% vs 28.3, p = 0.015) had a diagnostic interval >60 days in 2019 than 2014. Harder to diagnose cancers were more likely to present as emergencies and be subject to prolonged delays in both cohorts. Conclusions. The 2014 and 2018/19 cohorts were broadly similar. There is limited evidence that USC use had increased between 2014 and 2018/19. Harder to diagnose cancers are still most likely to present as emergencies and be subject to delays. Overall, it seems there were small improvements in cancer diagnosis prepandemic and a further audit could examine evidence for a postpandemic recovery.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重新审视苏格兰的癌症诊断:第二次苏格兰全国癌症诊断审计的进一步启示
目的。描述 2018/19 年度苏格兰初级医疗机构癌症诊断的特点,并与 2014 年的诊断活动进行比较。方法。对苏格兰全科医疗机构的癌症诊断进行全国性审计。参与审核的全科医生从医疗记录中收集了 2018/19 年度确诊癌症患者的诊断路径数据。这些数据通过与苏格兰癌症登记处和 2014 年以前的审计数据进行链接得到补充。分析探讨并比较了患者的人口统计学特征、发病情况、诊断路径和间隔时间。结果73 家医疗机构在 2014 年提交了 2,014 个病例的数据,90 家医疗机构在 2018/2019 年提交了 2,318 个病例的数据。个人人口统计学和癌症类型相似。2019年USC(紧急疑似癌症)转诊比例高于2014年(42.9% vs 38.1%,p=0.008),但急诊比例相似(19.2% vs 20.4%)。两个时期的初级医疗(中位数 4(IQR 0-22 ) vs 5(0-23))和诊断间隔(27(10-59) vs 30(13-68))相似。与2014年相比,2019年诊断间隔时间大于60天的患者明显较少(24.5% vs 28.3,p=0.015)。在这两个组群中,较难诊断的癌症更有可能作为急诊出现,并受到长时间的延误。结论。2014年和2018/19年队列大致相似。2014年至2018/19年期间,USC使用量增加的证据有限。较难诊断的癌症仍最有可能作为急症出现并受到延误。总体而言,流行前的癌症诊断似乎略有改善,进一步的审核可以检查流行后恢复的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Cancer Care
European Journal of Cancer Care 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.80%
发文量
213
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Cancer Care aims to encourage comprehensive, multiprofessional cancer care across Europe and internationally. It publishes original research reports, literature reviews, guest editorials, letters to the Editor and special features on current issues affecting the care of cancer patients. The Editor welcomes contributions which result from team working or collaboration between different health and social care providers, service users, patient groups and the voluntary sector in the areas of: - Primary, secondary and tertiary care for cancer patients - Multidisciplinary and service-user involvement in cancer care - Rehabilitation, supportive, palliative and end of life care for cancer patients - Policy, service development and healthcare evaluation in cancer care - Psychosocial interventions for patients and family members - International perspectives on cancer care
期刊最新文献
‘Death Doulas’ are not yet an Issue in German Palliative Care—A National Survey of Palliative Care Providers What is “Coaching” in Interventions for Patients in Cancer Care Research? A Systematic Scoping Review Risk Factors of Venous Thromboembolism After Radical Hysterectomy in Patients With Cervical Cancer Variation in the Diagnostic and Treatment Pathway in Peritoneal Mesothelioma: A Mixed-Methods Study in the United Kingdom Navigating What Is Not Known—Patients’ Experience of the Life Threat Connected to Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1