Primary Care System Factors and Clinical Decision-making in Patients that Could Have Lung Cancer: a Vignette Study in Five Balkan Region Countries.

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death, with wide variations in national survival rates. This study compares primary care system factors and primary care practitioners' (PCPs') clinical decision-making for a vignette of a patient that could have lung cancer in five Balkan region countries (Slovenia, Croatia, Bulgaria, Greece, Romania). METHODS: PCPs participated in an online questionnaire that asked for demographic data, practice characteristics, and information on health system factors. Participants were also asked to make clinical decisions in a vignette of a patient with possible lung cancer. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 475 PCPs. There were significant national differences in PCPs' direct access to investigations, particularly to advanced imaging. PCPs from Bulgaria, Greece, and Romania were more likely to organise relevant investigations. The highest specialist referral rates were in Bulgaria and Romania. PCPs in Bulgaria were less likely to have access to clinical guidelines, and PCPs from Slovenia and Croatia were more likely to have access to a cancer fast-track specialist appointment system. The PCPs' country had a significant effect on their likelihood of investigating or referring the patient. CONCLUSIONS: There are large differences between Balkan region countries in PCPs' levels of direct access to investigations. When faced with a vignette of a patient with the possibility of having lung cancer, their investigation and referral rates vary considerably. To reduce diagnostic delay in lung cancer, direct PCP access to advanced imaging, availability of relevant clinical guidelines, and fast-track referral systems are needed.

Primary care practitioners' diagnostic action when the patient may have cancer: an exploratory vignette study in 20 European countries.

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.

How European primary care practitioners think the timeliness of cancer diagnosis can be improved: a thematic analysis.

BACKGROUND: National European cancer survival rates vary widely. Prolonged diagnostic intervals are thought to be a key factor in explaining these variations. Primary care practitioners (PCPs) frequently play a crucial role during initial cancer diagnosis; their knowledge could be used to improve the planning of more effective approaches to earlier cancer diagnosis. OBJECTIVES: This study sought the views of PCPs from across Europe on how they thought the timeliness of cancer diagnosis could be improved. DESIGN: In an online survey, a final open-ended question asked PCPs how they thought the speed of diagnosis of cancer in primary care could be improved. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. SETTING: A primary care study, with participating centres in 20 European countries. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1352 PCPs answered the final survey question, with a median of 48 per country. RESULTS: The main themes identified were: patient-related factors, including health education; care provider-related factors, including continuing medical education; improving communication and interprofessional partnership, particularly between primary and secondary care; factors relating to health system organisation and policies, including improving access to healthcare; easier primary care access to diagnostic tests; and use of information technology. Re-allocation of funding to support timely diagnosis was seen as an issue affecting all of these. CONCLUSIONS: To achieve more timely cancer diagnosis, health systems need to facilitate earlier patient presentation through education and better access to care, have well-educated clinicians with good access to investigations and better information technology, and adequate primary care cancer diagnostic pathway funding.

Identifying important health system factors that influence primary care practitioners' referrals for cancer suspicion: a European cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVES: Cancer survival and stage of disease at diagnosis and treatment vary widely across Europe. These differences may be partly due to variations in access to investigations and specialists. However, evidence to explain how different national health systems influence primary care practitioners' (PCPs') referral decisions is lacking.This study analyses health system factors potentially influencing PCPs' referral decision-making when consulting with patients who may have cancer, and how these vary between European countries. DESIGN: Based on a content-validity consensus, a list of 45 items relating to a PCP's decisions to refer patients with potential cancer symptoms for further investigation was reduced to 20 items. An online questionnaire with the 20 items was answered by PCPs on a five-point Likert scale, indicating how much each item affected their own decision-making in patients that could have cancer. An exploratory factor analysis identified the factors underlying PCPs' referral decision-making. SETTING: A primary care study; 25 participating centres in 20 European countries. PARTICIPANTS: 1830 PCPs completed the survey. The median response rate for participating centres was 20.7%. OUTCOME MEASURES: The factors derived from items related to PCPs' referral decision-making. Mean factor scores were produced for each country, allowing comparisons. RESULTS: Factor analysis identified five underlying factors: PCPs' ability to refer; degree of direct patient access to secondary care; PCPs' perceptions of being under pressure; expectations of PCPs' role; and extent to which PCPs believe that quality comes before cost in their health systems. These accounted for 47.4% of the observed variance between individual responses. CONCLUSIONS: Five healthcare system factors influencing PCPs' referral decision-making in 20 European countries were identified. The factors varied considerably between European countries. Knowledge of these factors could assist development of health service policies to produce better cancer outcomes, and inform future research to compare national cancer diagnostic pathways and outcomes.

Cross-Cultural Validation of the Definition of Multimorbidity in the Bulgarian Language.

INTRODUCTION: Multimorbidity is a health issue with growing importance. During the last few decades the populations of most countries in the world have been ageing rapidly. Bulgaria is affected by the issue because of the high prevalence of ageing population in the country with multiple chronic conditions. The AIM of the present study was to validate the translated definition of multimorbidity from English into the Bulgarian language. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study is part of an international project involving 8 national groups. We performed a forward and backward translation of the original English definition of multimorbidity using a Delphi consensus procedure. RESULTS: The physicians involved accepted the definition with a high percentage of agreement in the first round. The backward translation was accepted by the scientific committee using the Nominal group technique. DISCUSSION: Some of the GPs provided comments on the linguistic expressions which arose in order to improve understanding in Bulgarian. The remarks were not relevant to the content. The conclusion of the discussion, using a meta-ethnographic approach, was that the differences were acceptable and no further changes were required. CONCLUSIONS: A native version of the published English multimorbidity definition has been finalized. This definition is a prerequisite for better management of multimorbidity by clinicians, researchers and policy makers.

Hidden patients: the relatives of patients in need of palliative care.

BACKGROUND: When identifying patients for palliative care, medical specialists find it necessary to disclose "hidden" patients: the patient's relatives. The issue has been discussed sporadically in Bulgaria; the present study was part of a larger investigation that examined the opinion of medical specialists, patients, and their relatives. METHOD: The study protocol was explained to participants who gave written informed consent. Patients (n=211) were followed up on by their general practitioners (GPs) (n=42) during one year. All relatives were invited, and 173 (82%) agreed and participated. A questionnaire created by the authors was used. The data were analyzed by frequency distribution (descriptive statistics) and nonparametric tests (Pearson's χ(2)) and statistically processed using SPSS 17.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). RESULTS: Relatives providing care were predominantly women, two-thirds over 60 years of age. There was a one-to-one ratio between caregivers for oncological and nononcological patients. The duration of care was more than one year in 53% of cases. Most relatives reported their loved ones found physical suffering "very hard to bear" (53%), while approximately 17% could not assess the extent of psychological suffering. The vast majority stated that they had difficulties in providing care, and 68% had financial problems in that respect. CONCLUSION: Including relatives as users and part of the palliative care team has been discussed in the literature. In Bulgaria, participation is solely due to the lack of organized services for palliative care. Relatives participate in activities that are performed by trained staff in countries with developed palliative care; these activities, along with negative emotional experiences and economic difficulties, overburden these caregiving relatives significantly.

Cross-cultural validation of the revised temperament and character inventory in the Bulgarian language.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Health-care professions have long been considered prone to work-related stress, yet recent research in Bulgaria indicates alarmingly high levels of burnout. Cloninger's inventory is used to analyse and evaluate correlation between personality characteristics and degree of burnout syndrome manifestation among the risk categories of health-care professionals. The primary goal of this study was to test the conceptual validity and cross-cultural applicability of the revised TCI (TCI-R), developed in the United States, in a culturally, socially and economically diverse setting. METHODS: Linguistic validation, test-retest studies, statistical and expert analyses were performed to assess cross-cultural applicability of the revised Cloninger's temperament and character inventory in Bulgarian, its reliability and internal consistency and construct validity. RESULTS: The overall internal consistency of TCI-R and its scales as well as the interscale and test-retest correlations prove that the translated version of the questionnaire is acceptable and cross-culturally applicable for the purposes of studying organizational stress and burnout risk in health-care professionals. CONCLUSIONS: In general the cross-cultural adaptation process, even if carried out in a rigorous way, does not always lead to the best target version and suggests it would be useful to develop new scales specific to each culture and, at the same time, to think about the trans-cultural adaptation.