Implementation and external validation of the Cambridge Multimorbidity Score in the UK Biobank cohort.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple conditions present a growing challenge for healthcare provision. Measures of multimorbidity may support clinical management, healthcare resource allocation and accounting for the health of participants in purpose-designed cohorts. The recently developed Cambridge Multimorbidity scores (CMS) have the potential to achieve these aims using primary care records, however, they have not yet been validated outside of their development cohort. METHODS: The CMS, developed in the Clinical Research Practice Dataset (CPRD), were validated in UK Biobank participants whose data is not available in CPRD (the cohort used for CMS development) with available primary care records (n = 111,898). This required mapping of the 37 pre-existing conditions used in the CMS to the coding frameworks used by UK Biobank data providers. We used calibration plots and measures of discrimination to validate the CMS for two of the three outcomes used in the development study (death and primary care consultation rate) and explored variation by age and sex. We also examined the predictive ability of the CMS for the outcome of cancer diagnosis. The results were compared to an unweighted count score of the 37 pre-existing conditions. RESULTS: For all three outcomes considered, the CMS were poorly calibrated in UK Biobank. We observed a similar discriminative ability for the outcome of primary care consultation rate to that reported in the development study (C-index: 0.67 (95%CI:0.66-0.68) for both, 5-year follow-up); however, we report lower discrimination for the outcome of death than the development study (0.69 (0.68-0.70) and 0.89 (0.88-0.90) respectively). Discrimination for cancer diagnosis was adequate (0.64 (0.63-0.65)). The CMS performs favourably to the unweighted count score for death, but not for the outcomes of primary care consultation rate or cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: In the UK Biobank, CMS discriminates reasonably for the outcomes of death, primary care consultation rate and cancer diagnosis and may be a valuable resource for clinicians, public health professionals and data scientists. However, recalibration will be required to make accurate predictions when cohort composition and risk levels differ substantially from the development cohort. The generated resources (including codelists for the conditions and code for CMS implementation in UK Biobank) are available online.

Healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial use in acute care hospitals: a point prevalence survey in Lombardy, Italy, in 2022.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare-Associated Infections (HAIs) are a global public health issue, representing a significant burden of disease that leads to prolonged hospital stays, inappropriate use of antimicrobial drugs, intricately linked to the development of resistant microorganisms, and higher costs for healthcare systems. The study aimed to measure the prevalence of HAIs, the use of antimicrobials, and assess healthcare- and patient-related risk factors, to help identify key intervention points for effectively reducing the burden of HAIs. METHODS: A total of 28 acute care hospitals in the Lombardy region, Northern Italy, participated in the third European Point Prevalence Survey (PPS-3) coordinated by ECDC for the surveillance of HAIs in acute care hospitals (Protocol 6.0). RESULTS: HAIs were detected in 1,259 (10.1%, 95% CI 9.6-10.7%) out of 12,412 enrolled patients. 1,385 HAIs were reported (1.1 HAIs per patient on average). The most common types of HAIs were bloodstream infections (262 cases, 18.9%), urinary tract infections (237, 17.1%), SARS-CoV-2 infections (236, 17.0%), pneumonia and lower respiratory tract infections (231, 16.7%), and surgical site infections (152, 11.0%). Excluding SARS-CoV-2 infections, the overall prevalence of HAIs was 8.4% (95% CI 7.9-8.9%). HAIs were significantly more frequent in patients hospitalized in smaller hospitals and in intensive care units (ICUs), among males, advanced age, severe clinical condition and in patients using invasive medical devices. Overall, 5,225 patients (42.1%, 95% CI 41.3-43.0%) received systemic antimicrobial therapy. According to the WHO's AWaRe classification, the Access group accounted for 32.7% of total antibiotic consumption, while Watch and Reserve classes accounted for 57.0% and 5.9% respectively. From a microbiological perspective, investigations were conducted on only 64% of the HAIs, showing, however, a significant pattern of antibiotic resistance. CONCLUSIONS: The PPS-3 in Lombardy, involving data collection on HAIs and antimicrobial use in acute care hospitals, highlights the crucial need for a structured framework serving both as a valuable benchmark for individual hospitals and as a foundation to effectively channel interventions to the most critical areas, prioritizing future regional health policies to reduce the burden of HAIs.

Primary care doctors retirements in the context of an ageing population in Italy.

Background: Ongoing shortages in primary care doctors/primary care paediatricians and increasing healthcare needs due to ageing of the population represent a great challenge for healthcare providers, managers, and policymakers. To support planning of primary healthcare resource allocation we analyzed the geographic distribution of primary care doctors/primary care paediatricians across Italian regions, accounting for area-specific number and age of the population. Additionally, we estimated the number of primary care doctors/primary care paediatricians expected to retire over the next 25 years, with a focus on the next five years. Study design: Ecological study. Methods: We gathered the list of Italian general practitioners and primary care paediatricians and combined them with the data from the National Federation of Medical Doctors, Surgeons and Dentists. Using data from the National Institutes of Statistics, we calculated the average number of patients per doctor for each region using the number of residents above and under 14 years of age for general practitioners and primary care paediatricians respectively. We also calculated the number of residents over-65 and over-75 years of age per general practitioner, as elderly patients typically have higher healthcare needs. Results: On average the number of patients per general practitioner was 1,447 (SD: 190), while for paediatricians it was 1,139 (SD: 241), with six regions above the threshold of 1,500 patients per general practitioner and only one region under the threshold of 880 patients per paediatrician. We estimated that on average 2,228 general practitioners and 444 paediatricians are going to retire each year for the next five years, reaching more than 70% among the current workforce for some southern regions. The number of elderly patients per general practitioner varies substantially between regions, with two regions having >15% more patients aged over 65 years compared to the expected number. Conclusions: over 65 years compared to the expected number. Conclusions. The study highlighted that some regions do not currently have the required primary care workforce, and the expec-ted retirements and the ageing of the population will exacerbate the pressure on the already over-stretched healthcare services. A response from healthcare administrations and policymakers is urgently required to allow equitable access to quality primary care across the country.

Impact of the Covid pandemic on timely cancer diagnosis across European healthcare settings: a scoping review.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic presented unprecedented challenges to European healthcare systems. The study aimed to review the available evidence on the impact of the pandemic on the timely diagnosis of cancer across European countries. The primary objective was to examine changes in diagnostic pathways and stage at diagnosis during the pandemic, compared to the pre-pandemic period, across European countries, taking healthcare system characteristics and COVID-19 policies into account. Methods: We conducted a review of the impact of the pandemic on cancer diagnosis in Europe, analyzing primary studies from 2018 to 2023 using both quantitative and qualitative methods through searches in PubMed and Scopus databases. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The main explanatory factors analyzed were grouped into two categories: Covid-policies (government responses, using the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker and its stringency index as key metrics) and healthcare characteristics (healthcare system models, expenditure and resources, including hospital beds and the ratio of medical doctors). Study design: Scoping review. Results: Overall, 127 papers were screened, 80 retrieved for full-text evaluation and 50 articles were included in the review. The studies encompassed a total of 509,753 patients from 17 European countries. The pandemic period was characterised by worse process and outcome measures for all examined cancers, except for lung cancer, compared to the pre-pandemic period. Group-ing countries based on government actions and policy responses (stringency index) did not show any differences in timely cancer diagnosis. Countries with lower healthcare expenditure (per capita expenditure <2,000 euros) or lower investments in prevention reported more cancer diagnostic delays during the pandemic. Countries with >20% of General Practitioners over the total number of physicians and with more hospital beds per population experienced fewer diagnostic delays during the pandemic. Conclusions: Overall, the review suggests that diagnostic pathways and cancer stage at diagnosis during the COVID-19 pandemic varied across Europe, with countries' healthcare expenditure, investments in prevention, the proportion of General Practitioners and the number of hospital beds per population possibly playing a role. This analysis can inform healthcare policies aimed at addressing post-pandemic challenges and formulating resilience plans for future emergencies.

Variations in avoidable hospital admissions and emergency visits by primary care characteristics: an ecological study in Italy.

Background: Primary healthcare plays a central role in providing preventive care, managing chronic conditions and reducing inappropriate emergency presentations. The study aimed at providing population-level evidence on the correlation between the characteristics of primary healthcare across Italian regions and health outcomes included in the National Programs Outcomes of the National Agency for Regional Healthcare Services. Study Design: Ecological study. Methods: We analysed healthcare data from the National Agency for Regional Healthcare Services, the public lists of primary care doctors and the National Federation of Surgeons and Dentists and the National Institutes of Statistics referring to the 20 Italian regions. Pearson's correlation and Spearman's correlation were used to assess the relationships between primary healthcare characteristics and health outcomes. Results: Overall, across all Italian regions each general practitioner had on average 1447 patients and was 57.5 years old. The study found positive correlations between the number of patients per general practitioner and non-urgent Emergency Department visits among adult patients (Pearson's r = 0.58, p = 0.008), the number of residents aged 65+ per general practitioner and the rate of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease admissions (Pearson's r = 0.49, p = 0.029), and the age of general practitioners and lower-extremity amputations in diabetes patients (Pearson's r = 0.56, p = 0.011). A negative correlation was observed between the age of general practitioners and urinary tract infection admissions (Pearson's r = -0.76; p < 0.001). A non-linear negative correlation was found between the age of general practitioners and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease admissions (Spearman's ρ = -0.46, p = 0.041). Conclusions: The findings emphasise the importance of guaranteeing sufficient numbers of primary healthcare physicians to meet patients' needs, and for limiting avoidable hospitalisations and emergency presentations. General practitioners' age might also influence the provision of care, but more research is needed on possible mechanisms.

COVID-19 Immunity in the Cohort of IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital Employees after BNT162b2 Vaccination: A Retrospective Observational Study.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic represents the most severe health and socioeconomic crisis of our century. It began with the first reports in China, in the Wuhan region in December 2019, and quickly spread worldwide, causing a new Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Among the population most at risk of infection and developing severe forms of the disease are the elderly and healthcare workers, who are more exposed to infected individuals. On December 11, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration approved the emergency use of the BNT162b2 vaccine, the first mRNA vaccine in history. Since then, the total number of vaccine doses administered has exceeded 12 billion. Italy was the first European country to be affected by the pandemic, recording the highest number of total COVID-19 cases (25,695,311) and, after the first 70 days, had the highest crude mortality rate (141.0 per 100,000). In this study, we analyze the rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers at the San Raffaele Scientific Institute in Milan before and after receiving the BNT162b2 vaccine. Study design: Retrospective observational cohort study. Methods: The study analyzed the immunization status of 858 employees of the San Raffaele Scientific Institute in Milan, including doctors, healthcare workers, and administrative staff. The analysis is based on previous studies on the same cohort and is integrated with extrapolation and additional analysis of data from the Preventive Medicine Service's Biobank dataset of the same hospital to estimate the infection rate, duration of the disease, and antibody levels recorded in the personnel before and after receiving the double BNT162b2 vaccination. Results: The analysis confirms the positive impact achieved by the introduction of mRNA vaccination in reducing the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate and increasing antibody levels in healthcare workers. Although the BNT162b2 vaccination may not provide complete protection against SARS-CoV-2, it appears to be able to reduce the number of infections, particularly the more severe and symptomatic forms often detected in individuals with various risk factors and comorbidities, making them more vulnerable. Healthcare workers, who have extensive contact with patients and record the greatest decrease in the infection rates, represent the population that receives the most benefit from vaccination. Conclusions: The evidence suggests that vaccinations are essential in protecting high-risk groups, such as healthcare workers, from SARS-CoV-2 infection. Providing adequate vaccination coverage to healthcare workers limits the spread of infections and decreases the severity of disease manifestations, while also reducing their duration.

A taxonomy of early diagnosis research to guide study design and funding prioritisation.

Researchers and research funders aiming to improve diagnosis seek to identify if, when, where, and how earlier diagnosis is possible. This has led to the propagation of research studies using a wide range of methodologies and data sources to explore diagnostic processes. Many such studies use electronic health record data and focus on cancer diagnosis. Based on this literature, we propose a taxonomy to guide the design and support the synthesis of early diagnosis research, focusing on five key questions: Do healthcare use patterns suggest earlier diagnosis could be possible? How does the diagnostic process begin? How do patients progress from presentation to diagnosis? How long does the diagnostic process take? Could anything have been done differently to reach the correct diagnosis sooner? We define families of diagnostic research study designs addressing each of these questions and appraise their unique or complementary contributions and limitations. We identify three further questions on relationships between the families and their relevance for examining patient group inequalities, supported with examples from the cancer literature. Although exemplified through cancer as a disease model, we recognise the framework is also applicable to non-neoplastic disease. The proposed framework can guide future study design and research funding prioritisation.

Do presenting symptoms, use of pre-diagnostic endoscopy and risk of emergency cancer diagnosis vary by comorbidity burden and type in patients with colorectal cancer?

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients often have pre-existing comorbidities, which can influence timeliness of cancer diagnosis. We examined symptoms, investigations and emergency presentation (EP) risk among colorectal cancer (CRC) patients by comorbidity status. METHODS: Using linked cancer registration, primary care and hospital records of 4836 CRC patients (2011-2015), and multivariate quantile and logistic regression, we examined variations in specialist investigations, diagnostic intervals and EP risk. RESULTS: Among colon cancer patients, 46% had at least one pre-existing hospital-recorded comorbidity, most frequently cardiovascular disease (CVD, 18%). Comorbid versus non-comorbid cancer patients more frequently had records of anaemia (43% vs 38%), less frequently rectal bleeding/change in bowel habit (20% vs 27%), and longer intervals from symptom-to-first relevant test (median 136 vs 74 days). Comorbid patients were less likely investigated with colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, independently of symptoms (adjusted OR = 0.7[0.6, 0.9] for Charlson comorbidity score 1-2 and OR = 0.5 [0.4-0.7] for score 3+ versus 0. EP risk increased with comorbidity score 0, 1, 2, 3+: 23%, 35%, 33%, 47%; adjusted OR = 1.8 [1.4, 2.2]; 1.7 [1.3, 2.3]; 3.0 [2.3, 4.0]) and for patients with CVD (adjusted OR = 2.0 [1.5, 2.5]). CONCLUSIONS: Comorbid individuals with as-yet-undiagnosed CRC often present with general rather than localising symptoms and are less likely promptly investigated with colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy. Comorbidity is a risk factor for diagnostic delay and has potential, additionally to symptoms, as risk-stratifier for prioritising patients needing prompt assessment to reduce EP.

Incidence trends for twelve cancers in younger adults-a rapid review.

Many cancer referral guidelines use patient's age as a key criterium to decide who should be referred urgently. A recent rise in the incidence of colorectal cancer in younger adults has been described in high-income countries worldwide. Information on other cancers is more limited. The aim of this rapid review was to determine whether other cancers are also increasing in younger age groups, as this may have important implications for prioritising patients for investigation and referral. We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science for studies describing age-related incidence trends for colorectal, bladder, lung, oesophagus, pancreas, stomach, breast, ovarian, uterine, kidney and laryngeal cancer and myeloma. 'Younger' patients were defined based on NICE guidelines for cancer referral. Ninety-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Findings show that the incidence of colorectal, breast, kidney, pancreas, uterine cancer is increasing in younger age groups, whilst the incidence of lung, laryngeal and bladder cancer is decreasing. Data for oesophageal, stomach, ovarian cancer and myeloma were inconclusive. Overall, this review provides evidence that some cancers are increasingly being diagnosed in younger age groups, although the mechanisms remain unclear. Cancer investigation and referral guidelines may need updating in light of these trends.

Morbidity and measures of the diagnostic process in primary care for patients subsequently diagnosed with cancer.

BACKGROUND: There is uncertainty regarding how pre-existing conditions (morbidities) may influence the primary care investigation and management of individuals subsequently diagnosed with cancer. METHODS: We identified morbidities using information from both primary and secondary care records among 11,716 patients included in the English National Cancer Diagnosis Audit (NCDA) 2014. We examined variation in 5 measures of the diagnostic process (the primary care interval, diagnostic interval, number of pre-referral consultations, use of primary care-led investigations, and referral type) by both primary care- and hospital records-derived measures of morbidity. RESULTS: Morbidity prevalence recorded before cancer diagnosis was almost threefold greater using the primary care (75%) vs secondary care-derived measure (28%). After adjustment, there was limited variation in the primary care interval and the number of pre-referral consultations by either definition of morbidity. Patients with more severe morbidities were less likely to have had a primary care-led investigation before cancer diagnosis compared with those without any morbidity (adjusted odds ratio, OR [95% confidence interval]: 0.72 [0.60-0.86] for Charlson score 3+ vs 0; joint P < 0.001). Patients with multiple primary care-recorded conditions or a Charlson score of 3+ were more likely to have diagnostic intervals exceeding 60 days (aOR: 1.26 [1.10-1.45] and 1.19 [>1.00-1.41], respectively), and more likely to receive an emergency referral (aOR: 1.60 [1.26-2.02] and 1.61 [1.26-2.06], respectively). CONCLUSION: Among cancer cases with up to 2 morbidities, there was no evidence of differences in diagnostic processes and intervals in primary care but higher morbidity burden was associated with longer time to diagnosis and higher likelihood of emergency referral.

Individuals with pre-existing long-term conditions (morbidities) may have a different pathways leading to their cancer diagnosis compared with those without such conditions but detailed evidence is limited. We aimed to investigate how morbidities were associated with a range of measures of the diagnostic process in primary care. We examined morbidity in 2 ways, using information from a primary care audit and hospital records. We found that three-quarters of patients were living with 1 or more conditions according to primary care-based information, while the prevalence was almost threefold lower when estimated using hospital records. There was little difference in the time from first primary care appointment to specialist referral and the number of appointments before specialist referral by morbidity, particularly when comparing patients with 1 or 2 conditions vs those without. However, patients with multiple conditions or more serious diseases experienced lower likelihood of investigation, greater likelihood of being sent to the hospital as an emergency, and longer time to diagnosis. We did not find evidence of substantial differences in primary care-based diagnostic processes by morbidity. However, once an initial referral has been made, multiple or more severe conditions appear to influence the time taken to reach a diagnosis.

Predictive values for different cancers and inflammatory bowel disease of 6 common abdominal symptoms among more than 1.9 million primary care patients in the UK: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The diagnostic assessment of abdominal symptoms in primary care presents a challenge. Evidence is needed about the positive predictive values (PPVs) of abdominal symptoms for different cancers and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using data from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) in the United Kingdom (2000-2017), we estimated the PPVs for diagnosis of (i) cancer (overall and for different cancer sites); (ii) IBD; and (iii) either cancer or IBD in the year post-consultation with each of 6 abdominal symptoms: dysphagia (n = 86,193 patients), abdominal bloating/distension (n = 100,856), change in bowel habit (n = 106,715), rectal bleeding (n = 235,094), dyspepsia (n = 517,326), and abdominal pain (n = 890,490). The median age ranged from 54 (abdominal pain) to 63 years (dysphagia and change in bowel habit); the ratio of women/men ranged from 50%:50% (rectal bleeding) to 73%:27% (abdominal bloating/distension). Across all studied symptoms, the risk of diagnosis of cancer and the risk of diagnosis of IBD were of similar magnitude, particularly in women, and younger men. Estimated PPVs were greatest for change in bowel habit in men (4.64% cancer and 2.82% IBD) and for rectal bleeding in women (2.39% cancer and 2.57% IBD) and lowest for dyspepsia (for cancer: 1.41% men and 1.03% women; for IBD: 0.89% men and 1.00% women). Considering PPVs for specific cancers, change in bowel habit and rectal bleeding had the highest PPVs for colon and rectal cancer; dysphagia for esophageal cancer; and abdominal bloating/distension (in women) for ovarian cancer. The highest PPVs of abdominal pain (either sex) and abdominal bloating/distension (men only) were for non-abdominal cancer sites. For the composite outcome of diagnosis of either cancer or IBD, PPVs of rectal bleeding exceeded the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE)-recommended specialist referral threshold of 3% in all age-sex strata, as did PPVs of abdominal pain, change in bowel habit, and dyspepsia, in those aged 60 years and over. Study limitations include reliance on accuracy and completeness of coding of symptoms and disease outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Based on evidence from more than 1.9 million patients presenting in primary care, the findings provide estimated PPVs that could be used to guide specialist referral decisions, considering the PPVs of common abdominal symptoms for cancer alongside that for IBD and their composite outcome (cancer or IBD), taking into account the variable PPVs of different abdominal symptoms for different cancers sites. Jointly assessing the risk of cancer or IBD can better support decision-making and prompt diagnosis of both conditions, optimising specialist referrals or investigations, particularly in women.

Opportunities for reducing emergency diagnoses of colon cancer in women and men: A data-linkage study on pre-diagnostic symptomatic presentations and benign diagnoses.

OBJECTIVES: To identify opportunities for reducing emergency colon cancer diagnoses, we evaluated symptoms and benign diagnoses recorded before emergency presentations (EP). METHODS: Cohort of 5,745 colon cancers diagnosed in England 2005-2010, with individually linked cancer registry and primary care data for the 5-year pre-diagnostic period. RESULTS: Colon cancer was diagnosed following EP in 34% of women and 30% of men. Among emergency presenters, 20% of women and 15% of men (p = 0.002) had alarm symptoms (anaemia/rectal bleeding/change in bowel habit) 2-12 months pre-diagnosis. Women with abdominal symptoms (change in bowel habit/constipation/diarrhoea) received a benign diagnosis (irritable bowel syndrome (IBS)/diverticular disease) more frequently than men in the year before EP: 12% vs. 6% among women and men (p = 0.002). EP was more likely in women (OR = 1.20; 95% CI 1.1-1.4), independently of socio-demographic factors and symptoms. Benign diagnoses in the pre-diagnostic year (OR = 2.01; 95% CI 1.2-3.3) and anaemia 2-5 years pre-diagnosis (OR = 1.91; 95% CI 1.2-3.0) increased the risk of EP in women but not men. The risk was particularly high for women aged 40-59 with a recent benign diagnosis vs. none (OR = 4.41; 95% CI 1.3-14.9). CONCLUSIONS: Women have an increased risk of EP, in part due to less specific symptoms and their more frequent attribution to benign diagnoses. For women aged 40-59 years with new-onset IBS/diverticular disease innovative diagnostic strategies are needed, which might include use of quantitative faecal haemoglobin testing (FIT) or other colorectal cancer investigations. One-fifth of women had alarm symptoms before EP, offering opportunities for earlier diagnosis.

Contrasting effects of comorbidities on emergency colon cancer diagnosis: a longitudinal data-linkage study in England.

BACKGROUND: One in three colon cancers are diagnosed as an emergency, which is associated with worse cancer outcomes. Chronic conditions (comorbidities) affect large proportions of adults and they might influence the risk of emergency presentations (EP). METHODS: We aimed to evaluate the effect of specific pre-existing comorbidities on the risk of colon cancer being diagnosed following an EP rather than through non-emergency routes. The cohort study included 5745 colon cancer patients diagnosed in England 2005-2010, with individually-linked cancer registry, primary and secondary care data. In addition to multivariable analyses we also used potential-outcomes methods. RESULTS: Colon cancer patients with comorbidities consulted their GP more frequently with cancer symptoms during the pre-diagnostic year, compared with non-comorbid cancer patients. EP occurred more frequently in patients with 'serious' or complex comorbidities (diabetes, cardiac and respiratory diseases) diagnosed/treated in hospital during the years pre-cancer diagnosis (43% EP in comorbid versus 27% in non-comorbid individuals; multivariable analysis Odds Ratio (OR), controlling for socio-demographic factors and symptoms: men OR = 2.40; 95% CI 2.0-2.9 and women OR = 1.98; 95% CI 1.6-2.4. Among women younger than 60, gynaecological (OR = 3.41; 95% CI 1.2-9.9) or recent onset gastro-intestinal conditions (OR = 2.84; 95% CI 1.1-7.7) increased the risk of EP. In contrast, primary care visits for hypertension monitoring decreased EPs for both genders. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with comorbidities have a greater risk of being diagnosed with cancer as an emergency, although they consult more frequently with cancer symptoms during the year pre-cancer diagnosis. This suggests that comorbidities may interfere with diagnostic reasoning or investigations due to 'competing demands' or because they provide 'alternative explanations'. In contrast, the management of chronic risk factors such as hypertension may offer opportunities for earlier diagnosis. Interventions are needed to support the diagnostic process in comorbid patients. Appropriate guidelines and diagnostic services to support the evaluation of new or changing symptoms in comorbid patients may be useful.

Do comorbidities influence help-seeking for cancer alarm symptoms? A population-based survey in England.

Background: We examined associations between different chronic morbidities and help-seeking for possible cancer symptoms. Methods: Postal survey of individuals aged >50 years in England. Participants could report prior morbidities in respect of 12 pre-defined conditions. Among patients experiencing possible cancer symptoms we examined associations between specific morbidities and self-reported help-seeking (i.e. contacted versus not contacted a GP) for each alarm symptom using regression analyses. Results: Among 2042 respondents (42% response rate), 936 (46%) recently experienced 1 of 14 possible cancer symptoms considered in our analysis. Of them, 80% reported one or more morbidities, most frequently hypertension/hypercholesterolemia (40%), osteomuscular (36%) and heart diseases (21%). After adjustment for socio-demographic characteristics, patients with hypertension/hypercholesterolemia were more likely to report help-seeking for possible cancer symptoms, such as unexplained cough (OR = 2.0; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-3.5), pain (OR = 2.2; 95% CI 1.0-4.5) and abdominal bloating (OR = 2.3; 95% CI 1.1-4.8). Urinary morbidity was associated with increased help-seeking for abdominal bloating (OR = 5.4; 95% CI 1.2-23.7) or rectal bleeding (OR = 5.8; 95% CI 1.4-23.8). In contrast, heart problems reduced help-seeking for change in bowel habits (OR = 0.4; 95% CI 0.2-1.0). Conclusions: Comorbidities are common and may facilitate help-seeking for possible cancer symptoms, but associations vary for specific symptom-comorbidity pairs. The findings can contribute to the design of future cancer symptom awareness campaigns.

Using the candidacy framework to understand how doctor-patient interactions influence perceived eligibility to seek help for cancer alarm symptoms: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: 'Candidacy' is concerned with the way people consider their eligibility for accessing health services. We used the Candidacy Framework to explore how the doctor-patient relationship can influence perceived eligibility to visit their General Practitioner (GP) among people experiencing cancer alarm symptoms. METHODS: We carried out a secondary analysis of qualitative interviews with 29 women and 33 men, aged ≥50 years experiencing cancer alarm symptoms, recruited through primary care. Interviews focused on symptom experience, help-seeking and primary care use. Framework analysis was used to analyse transcripts with a focus on GP-patient interactions. RESULTS: Perceived (im)permeability of services acted as a barrier to help-seeking, due to limited availability of appointments, time-limited communication and difficulties asserting candidacy. There was also a focal role of communication in building a positive doctor-patient relationship, with some participants describing resisting offers of appointments as a result of previous negative GP adjudication. These factors not only influenced the current consultation but had longer-term consequences for future consultation. CONCLUSIONS: Candidacy provides a valuable theoretical framework to understand the interactional factors of the doctor-patient relationship which influence perceived eligibility to seek help for possible cancer alarm symptoms. We have highlighted areas for targeted interventions to improve patient-centred care and improve earlier diagnosis.

A cross-sectional survey assessing factors associated with reading cancer screening information: previous screening behaviour, demographics and decision-making style.

BACKGROUND: There is broad agreement that cancer screening invitees should know the risks and benefits of testing before deciding whether to participate. In organised screening programmes, a primary method of relaying this information is via leaflets provided at the time of invitation. Little is known about why individuals do not engage with this information. This study assessed factors associated with reading information leaflets provided by the three cancer screening programmes in England. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey asked screening-eligible members of the general population in England about the following predictor variables: uptake of previous screening invitations, demographic characteristics, and 'decision-making styles' (i.e. the extent to which participants tended to make decisions in a way that was avoidant, rational, intuitive, spontaneous, or dependent). The primary outcome measures were the amount of the leaflet that participants reported having read at their most recent invitation, for any of the three programmes for which they were eligible. Associations between these outcomes and predictor variables were assessed using binary or ordinal logistic regression. RESULTS: After exclusions, data from 275, 309, and 556 participants were analysed in relation to the breast, cervical, and bowel screening programmes, respectively. Notable relationships included associations between regularity of screening uptake and reading (more of) the information leaflets for all programmes (e.g. odds ratio: 0.16 for participants who never/very rarely attended breast screening vs. those who always attended previously; p = .009). Higher rational decision-making scores were associated with reading more of the cervical and bowel screening leaflets (OR: 1.13, p < .0005 and OR: 1.11, p = .045, respectively). Information engagement was also higher for White British participants compared with other ethnic groups for breast (OR: 3.28, p = .008) and bowel (OR: 2.58, p = .015) information; an opposite relationship was observed for older participants (OR: 0.96, p = .048; OR: 0.92, p = .029). CONCLUSIONS: Interventions that increase screening uptake may also increase subsequent engagement with information. Future research could investigate how to improve engagement at initial invitations. There may also be scope to reduce barriers to accessing non-English information and alternative communication strategies may benefit participants who are less inclined to weigh up advantages and disadvantages as part of their decision-making.

The impact of body vigilance on help-seeking for cancer 'alarm' symptoms: a community-based survey.

BACKGROUND: The act of detecting bodily changes is a pre-requisite for subsequent responses to symptoms, such as seeking medical help. This is the first study to explore associations between self-reported body vigilance and help-seeking in a community sample currently experiencing cancer 'alarm' symptoms. METHODS: Using a cross-sectional study design, a 'health survey' was mailed through primary care practices to 4913 UK adults (age ≥50 years, no cancer diagnosis), asking about symptom experiences and medical help-seeking over the previous three months. Body vigilance, cancer worry and current illness were assessed with a small number of self-report items derived from existing measures. RESULTS: The response rate was 42% (N = 2042). Almost half the respondents (936/2042; 46%) experienced at least one cancer alarm symptom. Results from logistic regression analysis revealed that paying more attention to bodily changes was significantly associated with help-seeking for cancer symptoms (OR = 1.44; 1.06-1.97), after controlling for socio-demographics, current illness and cancer worry. Being more sensitive to bodily changes was not significantly associated with help-seeking. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents who paid attention to their bodily changes were more likely to seek help for their symptoms. Although the use of a cross-sectional study design and the limited assessment of key variables preclude any firm conclusions, encouraging people to be body vigilant may contribute towards earlier cancer diagnosis. More needs to be understood about the impact this might have on cancer-related anxiety.

Does public reporting improve the quality of hospital care for acute myocardial infarction? Results from a regional outcome evaluation program in Italy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether public reporting of performance data was associated with a change over time in quality indicators for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in Italian hospitals. DESIGN: Pre-post evaluation of AMI indicators in the Lazio region, before and after disclosure of the Regional Outcome Evaluation Program, and a comparative evaluation versus other Italian regions not participating in the program. SETTING/DATA SOURCES: Nationwide Hospital Information System and vital status records. PARTICIPANTS: 24 800 patients treated for AMI in Lazio and 39 350 in the other regions. INTERVENTION: Public reporting of the Regional Outcome Evaluation Program in the Lazio region. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Risk-adjusted indicators for AMI. RESULTS: The proportion of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients treated with percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) within 48 h in Lazio changed from 31.3 to 48.7%, before and after public reporting, respectively (relative increase 56%; P < 0.001). In the other regions, the proportion increased from 51.5 to 58.4% (relative increase 13%; P < 0.001). Overall 30-day mortality and 30-day mortality for patients treated with PCI did not improve during the study period. The 30-day mortality for STEMI patients not treated with PCI in Lazio was significantly higher in 2009 (29.0%) versus 2006/07 (24.0%) (P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Public reporting may have contributed to increasing the proportion of STEMI patients treated with timely PCI. The mortality outcomes should be interpreted with caution. Changes in AMI diagnostic and coding systems should also be considered. Risk-adjusted quality indicators represent a fundamental instrument for monitoring and potentially enhancing quality of care.

Universal screening for early detection of chronic autoimmune, metabolic and cardiovascular diseases in the general population using capillary blood (UNISCREEN): low-risk interventional, single-centre, pilot study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic autoimmune (type 1 diabetes and coeliac disease) and metabolic/cardiovascular (type 2 diabetes, dyslipidaemia, hypertension) diseases are highly prevalent across all age ranges representing a major public health burden. Universal screening for prediction/early identification of these conditions is a potential tool for reducing their impact on the general population. The aim of this study is to assess whether universal screening using capillary blood sampling is feasible at a population-based level. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a low-risk interventional, single-centre, pilot study for a population-based screening programme denominated UNISCREEN. Participants are volunteers aged 1-100 who reside in the town of Cantalupo (Milan, Italy) undergoing: (1) interview collecting demographics, anthropometrics and medical history; (2) capillary blood collection for measurement of type 1 diabetes and coeliac disease-specific autoantibodies and immediate measurement of glucose, glycated haemoglobin and lipid panel by point-of-care devices; (3) venous blood sampling to confirm autoantibody-positivity; (4) blood pressure measurement; (5) fulfilment of a feasibility and acceptability questionnaire. The outcomes are the assessment of feasibility and acceptability of capillary blood screening, the prevalence of presymptomatic type 1 diabetes and undiagnosed coeliac disease, distribution of glucose categories, lipid panel and estimate of cardiovascular risk in the study population. With approximately 3000 inhabitants, the screened population is expected to encompass at least half of its size, approaching nearly 1500 individuals. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol and the informed consent forms have been reviewed and approved by the San Raffaele Hospital Ethics Committee (approval number: 131/INT/2022). Written informed consent is obtained from all study participants or their parents if aged <18. Results will be published in scientific journals and presented at meetings. CONCLUSIONS: If proven feasible and acceptable, this universal screening model would pave the way for larger-scale programmes, providing an opportunity for the implementation of innovative public health programmes in the general population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05841719.

Underlying cancer risk among patients with fatigue and other vague symptoms: a population-based cohort study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Presenting to primary care with fatigue is associated with slightly increased cancer risk, although it is unknown how this varies in the presence of other 'vague' symptoms. AIM: To quantify cancer risk in patients with fatigue who present with other 'vague' symptoms in the absence of 'alarm' symptoms for cancer. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cohort study of patients presenting in UK primary care with new-onset fatigue during 2007-2015, using Clinical Practice Research Datalink data linked to national cancer registration data. METHOD: Patients presenting with fatigue without co-occurring alarm symptoms or anaemia were identified, who were further characterised as having co-occurrence of 19 other 'vague' potential cancer symptoms. Sex- and age-specific 9-month cancer risk for each fatigue-vague symptom cohort were calculated. RESULTS: Of 285 382 patients presenting with new-onset fatigue, 84% (n = 239 846) did not have co-occurring alarm symptoms or anaemia. Of these, 38% (n = 90 828) presented with ≥1 of 19 vague symptoms for cancer. Cancer risk exceeded 3% in older males with fatigue combined with any of the vague symptoms studied. The age at which risk exceeded 3% was 59 years for fatigue-weight loss, 65 years for fatigue-abdominal pain, 67 years for fatigue-constipation, and 67 years for fatigue-other upper gastrointestinal symptoms. For females, risk exceeded 3% only in older patients with fatigue-weight loss (from 65 years), fatigue-abdominal pain (from 79 years), or fatigue-abdominal bloating (from 80 years). CONCLUSION: In the absence of alarm symptoms or anaemia, fatigue combined with specific vague presenting symptoms, alongside patient age and sex, can guide clinical decisions about referral for suspected cancer.