Setting up a nurse-led 2-week-wait head and neck cancer diagnostic service.

The number of urgent '2-week-wait' referrals to hospital for people with suspected head and neck cancer being sent by primary care is constantly growing and it is becoming increasingly difficult for head and neck cancer services to meet this demand. In order for trusts to meet their Faster Diagnosis Standards, there needs to be an effective and efficient way to ensure there is capacity for patients to receive the appropriate assessments and diagnostic investigations without compromising the quality of care delivered. This article presents the proposal of introducing a nurse-led 2-week-wait clinic to meet the ever-growing demands on the service. There is discussion of the consultant-led training programme used to upskill an advanced nurse practitioner in a single-centre study, as well as explanation of the processes followed to maintain patient safety throughout the pilot project. There will also be consideration of clinical governance and discussion of how patient satisfaction with the novel service will be measured.

The National Health Service urgent cancer referral pathway for suspected urological cancers: early economic evaluation of a risk prediction test.

OBJECTIVES: In the UK, the number of patients urgently referred for suspected cancer is increasing, and providers are struggling to cope with demand. We explore the potential cost-effectiveness of a new risk prediction test - the PinPoint test - to triage and prioritize patients urgently referred with suspected urological cancers. METHODS: Two simulation models were developed to reflect the diagnostic pathways for patients with (i) suspected prostate cancer, and (ii) bladder or kidney cancer, comparing the PinPoint test to current practice. An early economic analysis was conducted from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. The primary outcomes were the percentage of individuals seen within 2 weeks and health care costs. An exploratory analysis was conducted to understand the potential impact of the Pinpoint test on quality-adjusted life years gained. RESULTS: Across both models and applications, the PinPoint test led to more individuals with urological cancer being seen within 2 weeks. Using PinPoint only to prioritize patients led to increased costs overall, whereas using PinPoint to both triage and prioritize patients led to cost savings. The estimated impact on life years gained/lost was very small and highly uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: Using the PinPoint test to prioritize urgent referrals meant that more individuals with urological cancer were seen within 2 weeks, but at additional cost to the NHS. If used as a triage and prioritization tool, the PinPoint test shortens wait times for referred individuals and is cost saving. More data on the impact of short-term delays to diagnosis on health-related quality of life is needed.

Assessing the Ability of Non-dermatology Physicians to Recognize Urgent Skin Diseases.

Introduction Many patients present to the emergency department with skin conditions that are not true dermatologic emergencies. Urgent skin conditions are uncommon. Because these conditions are rare, they can be sometimes challenging to diagnose. Few works of literature discussed the accuracy of non-dermatologists' initial judgment on dermatologic conditions concluding that non-dermatologists misdiagnose many common and uncommon skin conditions. Because the study was never done in our region, we aim to conduct an online assessment using a questionnaire assessing the ability of non-dermatologists to recognize urgent skin diseases at King Abdulaziz University Hospital (KAUH) in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted. Non-dermatologist physicians were contacted through their verified emails, provided by the secretaries of each department and the academic affairs unit. The questionnaire consisted of two main sections, the first section covered demographics, specialty, and academic level. The second part had eight questions, each containing a brief case scenario about an urgent dermatological condition with a picture of the condition attached. Participants were required to answer the questions and assess on a scale from one to 10 how confident they were about their answers. The responses were collected and analyzed. Results Out of all 161 responses, this study included 93 male physicians (57.8%) and 68 female physicians (42.2%). The mean age in the study was approximately 45 ± 3 years. This study showed that the percentage of accuracy by non-dermatologists in diagnosing urgent skin diseases given the typical presentation of the condition was (61.33%); nevertheless, the percentage decreased when it was recalculated in relation to the full level of confidence to (25.3%). Herpes zoster appeared to be the most recognizable urgent skin disease, and Pemphigus vulgaris was the least recognizable one. Conclusion This study shows that it is difficult for physicians to recognize some urgent skin diseases, which affects offering the optimum health care for the patients. Moreover, more dermatology-focused courses are needed to strengthen the knowledge about dermatological diseases.

Urgent referrals from primary care to dermatology for lesions suspicious for skin cancer: patterns, outcomes, and need for systems improvement.

Ideally, urgent dermatology referrals for evaluation of a lesion concerning for skin cancer should be triaged and processed with appropriate urgency by primary care and dermatology, respectively. We performed a retrospective single-institution study by conducting chart reviews of all dermatology referrals designated by primary care as urgent for evaluation of a lesion concerning for skin cancer. We identified 320 referrals placed between January 1 and December 31, 2018. Dermatology encounters for these patients occurred on or before 30 days for 50.6% of referrals and on or after 31 days for 38.4% of referrals, with 10.9% never completed. The percentage of all races excluding whites, non-Hispanic in the delayed appointment group (≥ 31 days) was 15.1% higher (95% CI 5.3-24.9) than in the timely appointment group (≤ 30 days). Similarly, the percentage of non-English languages in the delayed group was 7.1% higher (95% CI 0.5-13.7) than in the timely group. Overall, 15.8% of these referrals yielded diagnoses of malignancy, while 76.8% and 7.4% resulted in benign and pre-malignant diagnoses, respectively. The primary care team documented referral status (i.e., completed, incomplete, or pending) during their subsequent visits with the patients in only 37.5% of these referrals. Our findings demonstrate the need to improve the reliability of urgent referrals to ensure they occur in a timely manner with confirmation of "referral loop" closure at the referring clinician's end.

Outcomes and characteristics of Danish patients undergoing a lung cancer patient pathway without getting a lung cancer diagnosis. A retrospective cohort study.

Introduction: The organ-specific Danish cancer patient pathways (CPPs) including standard time frames were introduced in 2008-2009 securing fast tracks for cancer diagnosis and treatment. Previous studies of the CPPs have focussed on patients getting the suspected cancer diagnosis, whereas little is known about patients not getting the cancer diagnosis for which they were examined. We aimed to describe the characteristics of patients who completed a lung cancer CPP (LCPP) without getting a LC diagnosis. Furthermore, to assess the proportion of patients who had invasive procedures performed during the LCPP and radiographic examinations of the chest conducted 30 days prior to the LCPP and during the LCPP. Moreover, we aimed to describe the proportion of patients being diagnosed with any other cancer-type than LC or with non-malignant pulmonary diseases (NMPDs) during the LCPP. Methods: The study was a retrospective population-based cohort study based on Danish national registers. Patients completing a LCPP between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2016 without being diagnosed with LC and who were registered as initiating and completing the LCPP, a total of 35,809, were included in the study. Results: Invasive procedures were performed in 12,986 patients (37.4%) and almost all patients had CT-scans of thorax and lungs conducted 30 days prior to or during the LCPP. During the LCPP other cancer-types than LC were diagnosed in 1,537 patients (4.3% of the study population), including other primary thoracic malignancies in 312 patients, while 6,826 patients (19.1%) were diagnosed with NMPDs, most often infections or chronic respiratory diseases of lower airways. Conclusion: Besides diagnosing LC the LCPP may contribute significantly in diagnosing other primary and secondary cancers as well as non-malignant diseases.

Patient non-attendance at urgent referral appointments for suspected cancer and its links to cancer diagnosis and one year mortality: A cohort study of patients referred on the Two Week Wait pathway.

BACKGROUND: The 'Two Week Wait' policy aims to ensure patients with suspected cancer are seen within two weeks of referral. However, patient non-attendance can result in this target being missed. This study aimed to identify predictors of non-attendance; and analyse the relationship between attendance and outcomes including cancer diagnosis and early mortality. METHODS: A cohort study of 109,433 adults registered at 105 general practices, referred to a cancer centre within a large NHS hospital trust (April 2009 to December 2016) on the 'Two Week Wait' pathway. RESULTS: 5673 (5.2%) patients did not attend. Non-attendance was largely predicted by patient factors (younger and older age, male gender, greater deprivation, suspected cancer site, earlier year of referral, greater distance to the hospital) over practice factors (greater deprivation, lower Quality and Outcomes Framework score, lower cancer conversion rate, lower cancer detection rate). 10,360 (9.6%) patients were diagnosed with cancer within six months of referral (9.8% attending patients, 5.6% non-attending patients). Among these patients, 2029 (19.6%) died within 12 months of diagnosis: early mortality risk was 31.3% in non-attenders and 19.2% in attending patients. CONCLUSIONS: Non-attendance at urgent referral appointments for suspected cancer involves a minority of patients but happens in predictable groups. Cancer diagnosis was less likely in non-attending patients but these patients had worse early mortality outcomes than attending patients. The study findings have implications for cancer services and policy.

Ovarian cancer stage, variation in transvaginal ultrasound examination rates and the impact of an urgent referral pathway: A national ecological cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to determine whether variation in transvaginal ultrasound examination rates in Danish general practice populations is associated with ovarian cancer outcomes, and to explore the impact of the introduction of a cancer patient pathway for ovarian cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a national register-based cohort study of gynecological cancer-free women aged 40 years or above, living in Denmark and listed with a specific general practitioner in 2004-2014. Practice populations were divided into quartiles according to the general practitioners' transvaginal ultrasound propensity in the preceding year. Associations between transvaginal ultrasound rates and ovarian cancer outcomes were analyzed using Poisson and logistic regression. RESULTS: We included 2769 general practices with 1 739 422 listed women, of whom 5325 were diagnosed with ovarian cancer during the study period. Practices varied twofold in transvaginal ultrasound rates before and after the implementation of the cancer patient pathway. Before the cancer patient pathway was introduced, women listed with practices with the highest transvaginal ultrasound rates were diagnosed with earlier stages of ovarian cancer (odds ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.06 to 1.81) and had a higher proportion of borderline tumors (incidence rate ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.10 to 1.75) compared with women least exposed to transvaginal ultrasound. After the cancer patient pathway, no significant differences were identified between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Before the cancer patient pathway, women exposed most to transvaginal ultrasound were significantly more likely to be diagnosed with early stage ovarian cancer compared with those least exposed to transvaginal ultrasound. After the cancer patient pathway was implemented, the difference disappeared. This suggests that increased awareness and access to transvaginal ultrasound is useful for diagnosing early-stage ovarian cancer.

Mortality of patients examined at a diagnostic centre: A matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: 'Diagnostic Centres' has been established to provide a diagnostic pathway for patients with non-specific, serious symptoms that could be cancer. As little is known about the prognosis, we aimed to 1) analyse mortality of patients examined at the diagnostic centre, stratified on diagnostic outcome (cancer, serious-non-malignant disease, or other/no diagnosis), and 2) compare mortality for cancer patients examined at the diagnostic centre with cancer patients diagnosed through other routes. METHOD: Retrospective cohort study including 938 patients examined at the Diagnostic Centre, Silkeborg Regional Hospital, Denmark, during 2012-2014. Cancer patients examined at the diagnostic centre were matched (1:10) to a reference group of cancer patients diagnosed through other routes. Information on diagnosis, death, comorbidity and socioeconomic factors was obtained by linkage to national Danish registers. Mortality was assessed by Kaplan Meier mortality survival analysis and hazard ratios of death were estimated using Cox proportional regression analysis while adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: The 1-year cumulative mortality was 28% in cancer patients examined at the diagnostic centre. The hazard ratio of death was seven times increased in cancer patients compared to patients with other/no diagnosis. The hazard ratio of death was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.68; 1.22) in cancer patients examined at the diagnostic centre compared to cancer patients diagnosed through other routes. DISCUSSION: The mortality among cancer patients examined at the diagnostic centre was comparable to cancer patients diagnosed through other routes. The results indicate that cancer patients with non-specific serious symptoms do not have a worse prognosis than other cancer patients.

Routine blood tests and probability of cancer in patients referred with non-specific serious symptoms: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Danish cancer patients have lower survival rates than patients in many other western countries. Half of the patients present with non-alarm symptoms and thus have a long diagnostic pathway. Consequently, an urgent referral pathway for patients with non-specific serious symptoms was implemented throughout Denmark in 2011-2012. As part of the diagnostic workup, a panel of blood tests are performed for all patients referred by their general practitioner (GP) to the urgent referral pathway. In this study, we analysed the probability of being diagnosed with cancer in GP-referred patients with abnormal blood test results. METHOD: We performed a cohort study that included all patients aged 18 years or older referred by their GP to Silkeborg Regional Hospital for analysis of a panel of blood tests. All patients were followed for 3 months for a cancer diagnosis in the Danish Cancer Registry. The likelihood ratio and post-test probability of subsequently finding cancer were calculated in relation to abnormal blood test results. RESULTS: Among the 1499 patients included in the study, 12.2% were subsequently diagnosed with cancer. The probability of cancer increased with the number of abnormal blood tests. Patients with specific combinations of two abnormal blood tests had a 23-62% probability of cancer. Only a few single abnormal blood tests were linked with a high post-test probability of cancer, and most abnormalities were not specific to cancer. CONCLUSIONS: A number of specific abnormal blood tests and combinations of abnormal blood tests markedly increased the probability of cancer being diagnosed. Still, abnormal blood test results should be interpreted cautiously as most are non-specific to cancer. Thus, results from the blood test panel may strengthen the suspicion of cancer, but blood tests cannot be used as a stand-alone tool to rule out cancer.

Prognostic consequences of implementing cancer patient pathways in Denmark: a comparative cohort study of symptomatic cancer patients in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Cancer Patient Pathways (CPPs) were introduced in 2000-2015 in several European countries, including Denmark, to reduce the time to diagnosis and treatment initiation and ultimately improve patient survival. Yet, the prognostic consequences of implementing CPPs remain unknown for symptomatic cancer patients diagnosed through primary care. We aimed to compare survival and mortality among symptomatic patients diagnosed through a primary care route before, during and after the CPP implementation in Denmark. METHODS: Based on data from the Danish Cancer in Primary Care (CaP) Cohort, we compared one- and three-year standardised relative survival (RS) and excess hazard ratios (EHRs) before, during and after CPP implementation for seven types of cancer and all combined (n = 7725) by using life-table estimation and Poisson regression. RS estimates were standardised according to the International Cancer Survival Standard (ICSS) weights. In addition, we compared RS and EHRs for CPP and non-CPP referred patients to consider potential issues of confounding by indication. RESULTS: In total, 7725 cases were analysed: 1202 before, 4187 during and 2336 after CPP implementation. For all cancers combined, the RS3years rose from 45% (95% confidence interval (CI): 42;47) before to 54% (95% CI: 52;56) after CPP implementation. The excess mortality was higher before than after CPP implementation (EHR3years before vs. after CPP = 1.35 (95% CI: 1.21;1.51)). When comparing CPP against non-CPP referred patients, we found no statistically significant differences in RS, but we found lower excess mortality among the CPP referred (EHR1year CPP vs. non-CPP = 0.86 (95% CI: 0.73;1.01)). CONCLUSION: We found higher relative survival and lower mortality among symptomatic cancer patients diagnosed through primary care after the implementation of CPPs in Denmark. The observed changes in cancer prognosis could be the intended consequences of finding and treating cancer at an early stage, but they may also reflect lead-time bias and selection bias. The finding of a lower excess mortality among CPP referred compared to non-CPP referred patients indicates that CPPs may have improved the cancer prognosis independently.

Clinical characteristics and risk of serious disease in patients referred to a diagnostic centre: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the clinical characteristics of patients referred to a diagnostic centre through the Danish urgent referral pathway for non-specific serious symptoms. We aimed at estimating the distribution of serious disease and the diagnostic value of clinical characteristics for the diagnosis of cancer and serious non-malignant disease in these patients. METHOD: A cohort study of 938 patients referred by their GP to the diagnostic centre at Silkeborg Regional Hospital. All patients were followed up for three months in national registries. The likelihood ratio (LR) of cancer or serious non-malignant disease were calculated in relation to clinical characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 327 (34.9%) patients were diagnosed with new serious disease within three months: 118 patients (12.6%) with malignant disease and 209 patients (22.3%) with non-malignant disease. Most patients presented general symptoms. The highest LR of cancer was found for abdominal mass, high lactate dehydrogenase or abnormal findings in the diagnostic imaging. The highest LR of non-malignant disease was found for swollen joints or abnormal auscultation of lung or chest. CONCLUSIONS: Patients referred by their GP to the diagnostic centre have high risk of serious disease. A multidisciplinary diagnostic approach is needed to embrace the diagnostic spectrum.

GP Training practices in England: a description of their unique features based on national data.

Postgraduate general practitioner (GP) training structures have been reorganised with the formation of Health Education England (HEE). We aimed to broaden the findings of previous studies and identify key features of GP training practices. In particular, we wanted to extend previous findings regarding QOF achievement and patient experience derived from the General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS), with recent data on the use of urgent cancer referral pathways ('Two Week Wait', or '2WW,' referrals) and secondary care utilisation by GP training Practices. We compared training and non-training practices, adjusting for differences in practice size and demographic features. Compared with non-training practices, we found reported patient satisfaction with 'access' was 2.0% higher (p < 0.001), 'communication' 0.75% higher (p < 0.001), 'overall experience' 2.8% higher (p < 0.001), 'continuity of care' 2.2% lower (p < 0.001). Mean QOF scores were 11 points higher in training practices (p < 0.001). There were few differences between the two types of practice in terms of Emergency hospital admissions, Ambulatory Care Sensitive (ACSC) admissions, Accident and Emergency attendances and Out-Patient attendances. Training practices used the 2WW referral pathway more frequently than non-training practices resulting in a 1.1% higher 'cancer detection rate' (p = 0.007).

Exploration of the possible effect on survival of lead-time associated with implementation of cancer patient pathways among symptomatic first-time cancer patients in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of standardised cancer patient pathways (CPPs) has provided faster diagnosis of cancer. Cancer survival has improved during the same time period. Concern has been raised that the faster diagnosis may have introduced lead-time bias by elongating the period from diagnosis to death. AIM: We aimed to analyse the possible effect of lead time on survival due to expedited cancer diagnosis after the implementation of national CPPs among incident cancer patients diagnosed through Danish primary care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We used actual observed differences in diagnostic intervals to estimate the lead-time effect. We used data from sub-cohorts from the Danish Cancer in Primary Care (CaP) cohort of first-time cancer patients: before and after CPP implementation. To calculate differences in absolute survival, we estimated the survival function after advancing the date of diagnosis in the before cohort to an earlier point in time and hereby adjusting for lead time for nine cancer types and all combined by using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Advancing the date of diagnosis implied that the absolute one-year survival increased from 68.5% to 69.4%. This accounted for 13% of the observed differences in absolute one-year survival from before to after CPPs. CONCLUSION: The lead time caused by shorter diagnostic intervals after implementation of Cancer Patient Pathways seems to explain less than 15% of the observed changes in the one-year survival estimates for cancer patients in Denmark.

Tumour stage and implementation of standardised cancer patient pathways: a comparative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Some European countries have introduced standardised cancer patient pathways (CPPs), including urgent referrals, with the aim of diagnosing cancer at an earlier stage. This is despite a lack of evidence, particularly in patients with symptomatic cancer diagnosed via general practice. AIM: To compare tumour stages in patients with incident cancer diagnosed via general practice before, during, and after CPP implementation in Denmark in 2008-2009. DESIGN AND SETTING: A comparative cohort study of data from GPs and registries on patients with incident cancer listed with a GP before (n = 1420), during (n = 5272), and after (n = 2988) CPP implementation. METHOD: χ(2) test was used to compare stage distributions and logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (OR) of having local cancer after versus before CPP implementation. RESULTS: Distribution of tumour stages did not differ statistically significantly across time (P = 0.494) or between CPP use (P = 0.202). For all cancers combined, the OR of having local cancer after CPP implementation was 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.73 to 1.06) compared with before. For CPP-referred patients, the OR of having local cancer was 0.77 (95% CI = 0.62 to 0.94) compared with all patients before CPP implementation; the corresponding OR for non-CPP-referred patients was 0.96 (95% CI = 0.80 to 1.14). CONCLUSION: No clear tendencies were observed confirming earlier detection of cancer after rather than before CPP implementation. CPP-referred patients had lower odds of having local cancer after CPP implementation than all patients before CPP implementation; this could be because the GPs refer patients who are 'more ill' as urgent referrals.

DaPeCa-2: Implementation of fast-track clinical pathways for penile cancer shortens waiting time and accelerates the diagnostic process--A comparative before-and-after study in a tertiary referral centre in Denmark.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the feasibility and impact of a fast-track referral pathway on clinical time intervals in penile cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This observational study from a tertiary referral centre included 263 patients diagnosed before and after the introduction of an intervention to reduce clinical time intervals, the Cancer Patient Pathway (CPP). The CPP included fast-track referral and set time-frames for units participating in cancer diagnosis and treatment, and was introduced for penile cancer in Denmark on 1 January 2009. Median time intervals (in calendar days) with interquartile range were the main outcome measure. RESULTS: A trend towards reduction was observed in all clinical time intervals, with a statistically significant reduction in the system interval (p = 0.01) and tertiary centre interval (p < 0.0001). The proportion of patients treated within the maximum accepted time-frame of 37 days after referral steadily increased after implementation of the CPP. In particular, unjustified waiting time was reduced significantly. This was mainly achieved through pre-booking of appointments and diagnostic time slots by a dedicated clinical coordinator. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study examining the feasibility and impact of an intervention to reduce clinical time intervals in penile cancer. The Danish CPP was successful in reducing system and tertiary centre intervals. Future interventions need to address the long patient interval. Longer follow-up is needed to study the impact of CPP on mortality.

DaPeCa-2: Implementation of fast-track clinical pathways for penile cancer shortens waiting time and accelerates the diagnostic process--A comparative before-and-after study in a tertiary referral centre in Denmark.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the feasibility and impact of a fast-track referral pathway on clinical time intervals in penile cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This observational study from a tertiary referral centre included 263 patients diagnosed before and after the introduction of an intervention to reduce clinical time intervals, the Cancer Patient Pathway (CPP). The CPP included fast-track referral and set time-frames for units participating in cancer diagnosis and treatment, and was introduced for penile cancer in Denmark on 1 January 2009. Median time intervals (in calendar days) with interquartile range were the main outcome measure. RESULTS: A trend towards reduction was observed in all clinical time intervals, with a statistically significant reduction in the system interval (p = 0.01) and tertiary centre interval (p < 0.0001). The proportion of patients treated within the maximum accepted time-frame of 37 days after referral steadily increased after implementation of the CPP. In particular, unjustified waiting time was reduced significantly. This was mainly achieved through pre-booking of appointments and diagnostic time slots by a dedicated clinical coordinator. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study examining the feasibility and impact of an intervention to reduce clinical time intervals in penile cancer. The Danish CPP was successful in reducing system and tertiary centre intervals. Future interventions need to address the long patient interval. Longer follow-up is needed to study the impact of CPP on mortality.