RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this guideline is to assist FPs and other primary care providers with recognizing features that should raise their suspicions about the presence of lung cancer in their patients. COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE: Committee members were selected from among the regional primary care leads from the Cancer Care Ontario Provincial Primary Care and Cancer Network and from among the members of the Cancer Care Ontario Lung Cancer Disease Site Group. METHODS: This guideline was developed through systematic review of the evidence base, synthesis of the evidence, and formal external review involving Canadian stakeholders to validate the relevance of recommendations. REPORT: Evidence-based guidelines were developed to improve the management of patients presenting with clinical features of lung cancer within the Canadian context. CONCLUSION: Earlier identification and referral of patients with lung cancer might ultimately help improve lung cancer morbidity and mortality. These guidelines might also be of value for informing the development of lung cancer diagnostic programs and for helping policy makers to ensure appropriate resources are in place.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Atención Primaria de Salud/normas , Derivación y Consulta/normas , Amianto , Canadá , Diagnóstico Tardío/prevención & control , Disnea/etiología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria/normas , Hemoptisis/etiología , Ronquera/etiología , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/complicaciones , Neoplasias Pulmonares/epidemiología , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/epidemiología , Medición de Riesgo , Fumar/epidemiología , Contaminación por Humo de Tabaco/estadística & datos numéricos , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos XRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature and provide an update and integration of existing peer-reviewed guidelines with recent systematic reviews and with primary studies related to the early recognition and management of lung cancer in primary care. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for relevant articles. The quality of the evidence to support existing guideline recommendations, and the consistency of recommendations with updated evidence, were assessed. Applicability in a Canadian primary care setting was also evaluated. STUDY SELECTION: All studies that explored signs or symptoms of or risk factors for lung cancer in the primary care setting were included. All diagnostic studies in which symptomatic primary care patients underwent 1 or more investigations were also searched. SYNTHESIS: Recommendations were consistent among guidelines despite a paucity of supporting evidence. Updated evidence provided further support for the recommendations. Recommendations for identifying signs and symptoms of lung cancer presenting in primary care and for initial management can be adopted and applied within a Canadian primary care setting. CONCLUSION: This updated review of recommendations might help promote evidence-based practice and, ultimately, more timely management and improved prognosis for lung cancer patients. It might also assist in the development of lung cancer diagnostic assessment programs.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Atención Primaria de Salud/normas , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , HumanosAsunto(s)
Enfermedades Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Sífilis/diagnóstico , Canadá , Dolor en el Pecho/etiología , Exantema/etiología , Femenino , Humanos , Enfermedades Pulmonares/complicaciones , Enfermedades Pulmonares/patología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Necrosis , Escleritis/etiología , Sífilis/complicaciones , Sífilis/patología , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos XRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Multiple investigations often result in a lengthy process from the onset of lung cancer-related symptoms until diagnosis. An unpublished chart audit indicated suboptimal delays in patients' courses from onset of symptoms until diagnosis of cancer. METHODS: The Time to Treat Program was designed for patients with clinical or radiographic suspicion of lung cancer. Pre- and postimplementation data on median wait times were compared. RESULTS: From April 2005 to January 2007, 430 patients were referred. After Time to Treat Program implementation, the median time from suspicion of lung cancer to referral for specialist consultation decreased from 20 days to 6 days, and the median time from such referral to the actual consultation date decreased from 17 days to 4 days. The median time from specialist consultation to computed tomography scan decreased from 52 days to 3 days, and the median time from computed tomography scan to diagnosis decreased from 39 days to 6 days. Overall, the median time from suspicion of lung cancer to diagnosis decreased from 128 days to 20 days. Of all patients in the Time to Treat Program, 33% were eventually diagnosed with lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Time to Treat Program was effective in shortening the time from suspicion of lung cancer to diagnosis and reduced time intervals at each step in the process. Earlier diagnosis of lung cancer may allow increased treatment options for patients and may improve outcomes.