Use and diagnostic outcomes of cancer patient pathways in Denmark - is the place of initial diagnostic work-up an important factor?

INTRODUCTION: The Cancer Patient Pathway for Non-specific Symptoms and Signs of Cancer (NSSC-CPP) has been implemented in Denmark with regional and intra-regional differences. In some places, the initial diagnostic work-up (often including a CT scan) is performed by general practitioners (GPs) and in others by hospitals. Variations may influence the use of Organ Specific Cancer Patient Pathways (OS-CPPs) and prognostic outcomes for the patients. Therefore, the aims were: 1) To analyse how a CT scan referred from GP or hospital is followed by OS-CPPs and NSSC-CPPs at the national and regional level, and 2) To analyse, nationally and regionally, the diagnostic outcomes of persons referred to CT scan by either GP or hospital six months after and mortality one year after CT scan. METHODS: A nationwide population-based study including individuals with a first CT scan in 2013-2016, either referred from GP or hospital. RESULTS: Overall, individuals with a CT scan referred from GPs were more likely to start a NSSC-CPP or an OS-CPP than individuals with a CT scan referred by hospitals. Across the five Regions in Denmark, CT scans referred by GPs were associated with reduced odds of total mortality in all regions; (North, OR=0.78 [0.73 0.83], Central, OR=0.92 [0.87 0.96], South, OR=0.85 [0.81 0.89], Capital, OR=0.96 [0.91 1.00] and Zealand, OR=0.85 [0.79 0.90]) and increased odds of cancer-specific mortality in four regions, ORs ranging from 1.15-1.51 with no difference in Region North (1.00 [0.91 1.10]). CONCLUSION: No obvious association between more CT scans and CPPs and reduced diagnoses and mortality was observed. The different diagnostic models might not explain the prognostic outcomes, but the different use of CT scans in, and between Regions play a large role in the differences in incidence and mortality.

Learning strategies of general practitioners striving to achieve point-of-care ultrasound competence: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) is increasingly used in general practice despite the lack of official educational programmes or guidelines for general practitioners (GPs). AIM: To explore how GPs have learnt to use POCUS and which barriers they have encountered in their learning process. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study conducted in office-based general practice in Denmark. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 GPs who had implemented POCUS without supporting guidelines or regulations. Analysis was carried out using systematic text condensation. The interview data for this study were collected along with data used in a previous study. RESULTS: The participating GPs described having composed their own ultrasound education following a continuous learning process. Basic POCUS competences were achieved through formalized training sessions at hospital departments or courses. The GPs further developed and expanded their scanning skills through additional courses and continuous self-study practice on patients often while consulting internet sources, textbooks or colleagues. Lack of available ultrasound courses, supervision, and clinical guidelines together with time constraints and financial aspects were mentioned as barriers to their ultrasound training. CONCLUSION: This study showed how GPs had composed their own ultrasound education individually and differently, guided by their own experiences and beliefs about good clinical practice. Formalized ultrasound training was considered a prerequisite for achieving basic ultrasound competences while continuous practice was considered paramount to develop and maintain scanning skills. There were several obstacles to overcome in the learning process including lack of supervision, guidance, and opportunity for practicing skills.Key pointsLittle is known about the educational needs of general practitioners striving to achieve ultrasound competences.General practitioners described using formalized training to achieve basic scanning competences and continuous self-study and practice to further develop their skills.Lack of time, supervision, clinical guidelines and ultrasound courses were considered barriers in the learning process together with financial aspects.

Re: Hofmann et al. Overdiagnosis, one concept, three perspectives, and a model.

It is with great interest we have read the article "Overdiagnosis: one concept, three perspectives, and a model" by Hofmann and colleagues. We share the authors' ambition of understanding what overdiagnosis is and what it isn't. In our research, we define overdiagnosis on the basis of two interrelated phenomena: overdetection and overdefinition. Overdetection is the labelling of a person with a disease or abnormal condition, that would not have caused the person harm, e.g., symptoms or death, if left undiscovered. Overdefinition is the creation of new diagnoses by overmedicalising ordinary life experiences or expanding existing diagnoses by lowering thresholds or widening diagnostic criteria, without evidence of improved outcomes. These phenomena have different causes and thereby often different drivers. However, they have one important consequence in common: people are turned into patients unnecessarily, i.e., overdiagnosed. On a personal level, overdiagnosis cause various types of harms, including physical, psychological, social and financial harm. On a societal level, overdiagnosis may also cause harm to public health, cause resource waste, and cultural changes with overmedicalisation of normal life events. By definition, none of the aforementioned phenomena lead to any clinical benefit. Therefore, we disagree with Hofmann and colleagues' definition of overdiagnosis as diagnoses that "…on balance, do more harm than good.". We argue that introducing balance and benefits to the definition of overdiagnosis complicates the concept unnecessarily and cause problems operationalising overdiagnosis.

'You should see a doctor', said the robot: Reflections on a digital diagnostic device in a pandemic age.

AIMS: In three days at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Copenhagen Emergency Medical Services developed a digital diagnostic device. The purpose was to assess and triage potential COVID-19 symptoms and to reduce the number of calls to public health-care helplines. The device was used almost 150,000 times in a few weeks and was described by politicians and administrators as a solution and success. However, high usage cannot serve as the sole criterion of success. What might be adequate criteria? And should digital triage for citizens by default be considered low risk? METHODS: This paper reflects on the uncertain aspects of the performance, risks and issues of accountability pertaining to the digital diagnostic device in order to draw lessons for future improvements. The analysis is based on the principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM), the EU and US regulations of medical devices and the taxonomy of uncertainty in health care by Han et al. RESULTS: Lessons for future digital devices are (a) the need for clear criteria of success, (b) the importance of awareness of other severe diseases when triaging, (c) the priority of designing the device to collect data for evaluation and (d) clear allocation of responsibilities. CONCLUSIONS: A device meant to substitute triage for citizens according to its own criteria of success should not by default be considered as low risk. In a pandemic age dependent on digitalisation, it is therefore important not to abandon the ethos of EBM, but instead to prepare the ground for new ways of building evidence of effect.

Danish general practitioners have found their own way of using point-of-care ultrasonography in primary care: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners increasingly use point-of-care ultrasonography despite a lack of evidence-based guidelines for their appropriate use in primary care. Little is known about the integration of ultrasonography in general practice consultations and the impact of its use on patient care. The purpose of this study was to explore general practitioners' experiences of using ultrasonography in the primary care setting. METHODS: Adopting an explorative phenomenological approach, we performed semi-structured interviews with general practitioners who used ultrasonography in their daily work. Thirteen general practitioners were recruited stepwise, aiming for maximum variation in background characteristics. Interviews were conducted at the general practitioner's own clinic. Transcription and systematic text condensation analysis began immediately after conducting each interview. RESULTS: The general practitioners described using ultrasonography for both selected focused examinations and for explorative examinations. The two types of examinations were described differently for each of the following emerging themes: motivation for using ultrasonography, ultrasonography as part of the consultation, selection of an ultrasound catalogue, and consequences of the general practitioner's ultrasound examination. The general practitioners had chosen and integrated their own individual ultrasound catalogue of focused examinations as a natural part of their consultations. The focused examinations were used to answer simple clinical questions and they had a significant impact on the patients' diagnoses, clinical pathways and treatments. The general practitioners considered their own catalogue of focused examinations as their comfort zone. However, they also performed explorative ultrasound examinations outside their catalogue. These scans were performed to train, gain or maintain ultrasound competences or as explorative examinations driven by curiosity. The explorative ultrasound examinations rarely had an impact on patient care. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes how general practitioners found their own way of using ultrasonography in general practice and selected a personal catalogue of ultrasound examinations that was applicable, relevant and meaningful for their daily clinical routines. This study may serve to inform implementation strategies in general practice by offering insights into central aspects that drive general practitioners' behaviours.

Diagnostic flow for all patients referred with non-specific symptoms of cancer to a diagnostic centre in Denmark: A descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Since 2012, Cancer Patient Pathways for Non-specific Symptoms and Signs of Cancer (NSSC-CPP) have been implemented in Scandinavia and UK. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe the diagnostic flow for all patients referred from 1 January to 30 June 2020 to the NSSC-CPP in the Diagnostic Centre in Farsø (DC-F), Denmark. METHODS: During the study period, we prospectively recorded information on the diagnostic flow, including: pathway trajectory, symptoms and findings leading to referral, diagnostic procedures and diagnoses at the end of DC Farsø work-up and within 6-months for all patients referred to the NSSC-CPP in DC Farsø using electronic patient files and the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR). RESULTS: Of the 314 referrals to DC Farsø, 227 had diagnostic work-up in DC Farsø, the remaining were redirected to other CPPs (n = 11), outpatient clinics (n = 45) or redirected to general practice (n = 25). Of total referrals, 25 (8%) received a malignant diagnosis, 20 (6%) a non-malignant but clinically relevant diagnosis with initiation of treatment, 16 (5%) a non-malignant diagnosis but no treatment needed and in 253 (81%) referrals no severe new condition was diagnosed. Two (1%) additional malignancies were diagnosed within a 6-month follow-up period. CONCLUSION: By tracking all patients referred to the NSSC-CPP in DC Farsø, including those redirected, this is the first study to describe the diagnostic flow for all patients referred to a diagnostic centre in Denmark. This knowledge is important for further organisation and planning of the NSSC-CPP.

Eight percent of NSSC-CPP referrals yielded cancer diagnoses, with two additional cancers diagnosed in a 6-month follow-up.Over one-fourth of referrals to NSSC-CPP were redirected to other departments or general practitioners.This study outlines the diagnostic flow for all NSSC-CPP-referred patients, offering unique insights crucial for comparing European diagnostic practices.

General practitioners' experiences of providing somatic care for patients with severe mental illness: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Patients dealing with severe mental illnesses (SMI) often face suboptimal clinical outcomes and higher mortality rates due to a range of factors, including undetected physical health conditions. The provision of care for individuals with SMI is frequently disjointed, as they engage with diverse healthcare providers. Despite this fragmentation, primary care, particularly general practitioners (GPs), assumes a pivotal role in the care of SMI patients. Our study aimed to delve into the first-hand experiences of GPs in delivering somatic care to SMI patients, concentrating on the challenges they encounter and the strategies they employ to navigate these difficulties. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with fifteen GPs, utilizing a semi-structured interview guide, supplemented by ethnographic observations during clinical consultations in general practice. Through inductive coding, interview transcripts and observational field notes were systematically analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA). The findings were then deliberated upon within the author group. RESULTS: GPs revealed that managing the chronic somatic care of SMI patients posed significant challenges. These challenges encompassed the multifaceted needs of patients, their behavior tied to symptoms, a lack of care continuity, and overarching time constraints. To tackle these challenges, the GPs had devised various strategies. However, all participants underscored the critical importance of having adequate time to properly prepare for, conduct, and follow up on consultations. CONCLUSION: The GPs' interactions with SMI patients brought numerous challenges, although treating these patients were concurrently acknowledged as vital and fulfilling. The findings suggest that increased allocated time in general practice consultations for patients with SMI is important to support the somatic treatment requirements of this patient group.

Rethinking the logic of early diagnosis in cancer.

To reduce morbidity and mortality of cancer, more countries have implemented strategies to detect cancer, based on the logic of 'the sooner the better'. Time is thereby an essential component in how cancer research, policies, and prevention are practiced today. Where the logic of early diagnosis benefits some, the logic also produces harms. In this article, we use a cross-disciplinary case-study design to discuss how different notions of time and linearity are essential in today's research ontology of cancer, describe the individual and societal consequences of such ontology, and invite a rethinking of time in cancer. Drawing on theoretical concepts of time together with cancer epidemiological, historical and ethnographical data, we analyse how the logic of early diagnosis has been established as a stable concept. Although evidence supporting the logic points in different directions, the message 'the sooner the better' is currently not being challenged by research, policy or society. This at least partly, can be explained by a linear perception of time and societal traces of neoliberalism and acceleration in our society together with cancer still being a somewhat enigmatic disease that requires acute action. To support a sustainable healthcare sector, we argue there is a need to nuance the logic of early diagnosis. Continuing the linear perception of symptoms and cancer, risks doing more harm than good by making more people patients unnecessarily and by spending health resources on those with the least need.

Measuring needs-based quality of life and self-perceived health inequity in patients with multimorbidity: investigating psychometric measurement properties of the MultiMorbidity Questionnaire (MMQ) using primarily Rasch models.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is a burden for the individual and to the healthcare sector worldwide, leading to a rising number of intervention studies towards this patient group. To measure a possible effect of such interventions, an adequate patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) is essential. The aim of this study was to assess the draft MultiMorbidity Questionnaire (MMQ), a PROM measuring needs-based quality of life and self-perceived inequity in patients with multimorbidity, for its psychometric properties and to adjust it accordingly to create a content- and construct valid measure. METHODS: The draft MMQ was sent to 1198 eligible respondents with multimorbidity. Modern test theory and classical test theory were used to analyse data. Dimensionality of the suggested domains and invariance of the items were assessed through item analysis, examining the fit to a psychometric model. RESULTS: The psychometric analyses were based on responses from 390 patients with multimorbidity. In the MMQ1, measuring needs-based QoL, evidence of six unidimensional scales was confirmed: physical ability (6 items), worries (6 items), limitations in everyday life (10 items), my social life (6 items), self-image (6 items), and personal finances (3 items). The psychometric analyses of the MMQ2 outlined four unidimensional scales measuring the feeling of Self-perceived inequity in patients with multimorbidity: experiences of being stigmatised (4-5 items), Experiences of insufficient understanding of the burden of disease (3 items), Experiences of not being seen and heard (4 items), Experience of powerlessness (5 items). These scales are relevant for patients' with multimorbidity encounters with (1) their general pratitioner, (2) staff at their general practitioner's surgery, (3) healthcare professionals, (4) staff at the local authorities and (5) friends, family, and others. CONCLUSION: The MMQ, a QoL measure for patients living with multimorbidity has been validated: the MMQ1 is a condition-specific PROM with adequate psychometric properties designed to measure needs-based QoL. The MMQ2 measuring Self-perceived inequity, has also been found to possess adequate measurement properties; however due to the risk of type 2 error a revalidation of MMQ2 is suggested.

Data as symptom: Doctors' responses to patient-provided data in general practice.

People are increasingly able to generate their own health data through new technologies such as wearables and online symptom checkers. However, generating data is one thing, interpreting them another. General practitioners (GPs) are likely to be the first to help with interpretations. Policymakers in the European Union are investing heavily in infrastructures to provide GPs access to patient measurements. But there may be a disconnect between policy ambitions and the everyday practices of GPs. To investigate this, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 23 Danish GPs. According to the GPs, patients relatively rarely bring data to them. GPs mostly remember three types of patient-generated data that patients bring to them for interpretation: heart and sleep measurements from wearables and results from online symptom checkers. However, they also spoke extensively about data work with patient queries concerning measurements from the GPs' own online Patient Reported Outcome system and online access to laboratory results. We juxtapose GP reflections on these five data types and between policy ambitions and everyday practices. These data require substantial recontextualization work before the GPs ascribe them evidential value and act on them. Even when they perceived as actionable, patient-provided data are not approached as measurements, as suggested by policy frameworks. Rather, GPs treat them as analogous to symptoms-that is to say, GPs treat patient-provided data as subjective evidence rather than authoritative measures. Drawing on Science and Technology Studies (STS) literature,we suggest that GPs must be part of the conversation with policy makers and digital entrepreneurs around when and how to integrate patient-generated data into healthcare infrastructures.

Factors associated with a clinically relevant reduction in menopausal symptoms of a standardized acupuncture approach for women with bothersome menopausal symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about factors associated with a clinically relevant reduction in menopausal symptoms through a brief acupuncture approach for women with moderate-to-severe menopausal symptoms. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial where participants were allocated to early versus late standardized acupuncture. Both the early group and the late group are included in this study. The late group got an identical intervention parallel staged by 6 weeks. By means of the relative importance, the effect was evaluated for both early versus late women with a 6-week follow-up. We included four symptom subscales from the validated MenoScores Questionnaire: hot flushes, day and night sweats, general sweating, menopausal-specific sleeping problems, as well as an overall score, which is the sum of the four outcomes in the analysis. RESULTS: 67 women with moderate to severe menopausal symptoms were included of whom 52 (77.6%) experienced a clinically relevant reduction in any of the four surveyed symptom subscales or overall score. 48 (71.6%) women experienced a clinically relevant reduction in any of the vasomotor symptom subscales: hot flushes, day and night sweats, general sweating. Women with vocational education were most likely to experience improvement compared to women with higher education. Beyond education, other factors of some importance for a clinically relevant reduction were no alcohol consumption, two or more births and urinary incontinence. CONCLUSIONS: Level of education was the most consistent factor associated with improvement. Beyond education, other factors of some importance were no alcohol consumption, two or more births and urinary incontinence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov at April 21, 2016. The registration number is NCT02746497 .

Specific Measures of Quality of Life in Patients with Multimorbidity in Primary Healthcare: A Systematic Review on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures' Adequacy of Measurement.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to search systematically for Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) used among patients with multimorbidity. Furthermore, the aim is to evaluate the adequacy and validity of the PROMs identified. DESIGN AND SETTING: This systematic review follows the PRISMA guidelines. To assess the adequacy and validity of the identified PROMs the COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist is used, more specifically a validation of the development, content validity, structural validity, and internal consistency of the PROMs. RESULTS: Four PROMs were identified in the primary search, and one was found from references. The sixth PROM was published after the primary search. None of the identified PROMs were aimed specifically at measuring the quality of life in patients with multimorbidity. According to the checklist, the development process and content validity were rated "adequate" in only one measure and "invalid"/"doubtful"/"inadequate" in the rest of the measures. The structural validity of the measures was rated "adequate" in four measures and "very good" in one. Regarding the internal consistency, two measures were rated doubtful and three "very good". None of the six PROMs reported analyses about invariant measurement. The COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist proved easy to use; however, there are some concerns in the rating of bias, that are discussed further. CONCLUSION: All six PROMs developed for patients with multimorbidity identified possessed inadequacy in their measurement properties. Therefore, the aim for the future is to develop a valid and adequate measure of the quality of life among patients with multimorbidity.

Validation of a health screening questionnaire for primary care using Rasch models.

BACKGROUND: Health inequality is on the rise due to various social and individual factors. While preventive health checks (PHC) aim to counteract health inequality, there is robust evidence against the use of PHC in general practice. It is unknown which factors can identify persons who will benefit from preventive interventions that are more beneficial than harmful. Hence, valid screening instruments are needed. METHODS: The aim of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of a screening questionnaire (SQ-33), which targets vulnerable persons in primary care practice who can benefit from preventive consultations. Survey data were acquired from 20 primary care clinical practices in the Northern Region of Jutland, Denmark. Respondents were 2056 persons between 20 and 44 years old who, for any reason, consulted their family doctor. The psychometric properties of the SQ-33 were assessed using Rasch item response modelling. Follow-up analysis was performed on a subsample of 364 persons one year subsequent to initial inclusion, in order to assess responsiveness and predictive validity using a general health anchor item. RESULTS: Twenty-three of the SQ-33 items in four subscales fit a Graphical loglinear Rasch model (GLLRM) at baseline and follow-up, thus confirming the scaling properties. The modified 23-item version (HSQ-23) revealed superior responsiveness and predictive validity compared with the SQ-33. CONCLUSIONS: The Health Screening Questionnaire (HSQ-23) was shown to possess adequate psychometric properties and responsiveness and can thus be used as an outcome measure in preventive intervention studies. Future study should address whether the HSQ-23 successfully identifies patients who will benefit from PHC consultations.

Quaternary prevention: reviewing the concept.

BACKGROUND: According to the Wonca International Dictionary for General/Family Practice Quaternary Prevention is defined as: 'Action taken to identify patient at risk of overmedicalization, to protect him from new medical invasion, and to suggest to him interventions, which are ethically acceptable.' The concept of quaternary prevention was initially proposed by Marc Jamoulle and the targets were mainly patients with illness but without a disease. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this opinion article is to open the debate around a new possible definition and a new conceptual model of quaternary prevention based on the belief that quaternary prevention should be present in physicians' minds for every intervention they suggest to a patient. DISCUSSION: The debate around quaternary prevention is vital in the context of contemporary medicine and has expanded worldwide. The human being may suffer harm from medical interventions from conception, during their childhood, during their entire healthy lifetime as well as during a self-limited disease, a chronic disease, or a terminal disease. The current definition of quaternary prevention has limitations because it excludes patients and medical interventions where a quaternary prevention perspective would be needed and useful to protect patients from harm. In this context, a new definition and conceptual model of quaternary prevention is proposed. CONCLUSION: In this new proposal, quaternary prevention is defined as an 'action taken to protect individuals (persons/patients) from medical interventions that are likely to cause more harm than good.'