Should we share breast density information during breast cancer screening in the United Kingdom? an integrative review.

OBJECTIVE: Dense breasts are an established risk factor for breast cancer and also reduce the sensitivity of mammograms. There is increasing public concern around breast density in the UK, with calls for this information to be shared at breast cancer screening. METHODS: We searched the PubMed database, Cochrane Library and grey literature, using broad search terms in October 2022. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of each included study. The results were narratively synthesised by five research questions: desire for information, communication formats, psychological impact, knowledge impact and behaviour change. RESULTS: We identified 19 studies: three Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs), three cohort studies, nine cross-sectional studies, one qualitative interview study, one mixed methods study and two 2021 systematic reviews. Nine studies were based in the United States of America (USA), five in Australia, two in the UK and one in Croatia. One systematic review included 14 USA studies, and the other 27 USA studies, 1 Australian and 1 Canadian. The overall GRADE evidence quality rating for each research question was very low to low.Generally, participants wanted to receive breast density information. Conversations with healthcare professionals were more valued and effective than letters. Breast density awareness after notification varied greatly between studies.Breast density information either did not impact frequency of mammography screening or increased the intentions of participants to return for routine screening as well as intention to access, and uptake of, supplementary screening. People from ethnic minority groups or of lower socioeconomic status (SES) had greater confusion following notification, and, along with those without healthcare insurance, were less likely to access supplementary screening. CONCLUSION: Breast density specific research in the UK, including different communities, is needed before the UK considers sharing breast density information at screening. There are also practical considerations around implementation and recording, which need to be addressed. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Currently, sharing breast density information at breast cancer screening in the UK may not be beneficial to participants and could widen inequalities. UK specific research is needed, and measurement, communication and future testing implications need to be carefully considered.

Palliative care outcomes in surgical oncology patients with advanced malignancies: a mixed methods approach.

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare outcomes and processes of hospital-based early palliative care with standard care in surgical oncology patients (N = 152). METHODS: A randomized, mixed methods, longitudinal study evaluated the effectiveness of a hospital-based Pain and Palliative Care Service (PPCS). Interviews were conducted presurgically and at follow-up visits up to 1 year. Primary outcome measures included the Gracely Pain Intensity and Unpleasantness Scales and the Symptom Distress Scale. Qualitative interviews assessed social support, satisfaction with care, and communication with providers. Survival analysis methods explored factors related to treatment crossover and study discontinuation. Models for repeated measures within subjects over time explored treatment and covariate effects on patient-reported pain and symptom distress. RESULTS: None of the estimated differences achieved statistical significance; however, for those who remained on study for 12 months, the PPCS group performed better than their standard of care counterparts. Patients identified consistent communication, emotional support, and pain and symptom management as positive contributions delivered by the PPCS. CONCLUSIONS: It is unclear whether lower pain perceptions despite greater symptom distress were clinically meaningful; however, when coupled with the patients' perceptions of their increased resources and alternatives for pain control, one begins to see the value of an integrated PPCS.

Long-term planning to meet UK government coronary heart disease revascularization targets.

The National Service Framework (NSF) for Coronary Heart Disease, published in the UK in 2000, gave target intervention rates of 750 procedures per million population (pmp) for both percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTCA) and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). This paper describes how one Regional Office of the Department of Health, with CABG and PTCA rates of around half the NSF target levels, designed a strategy to plan rationally to meet the derived population need for these procedures. A bottom-up needs assessment model was used to predict the population need for these procedures for the Eastern Region of the UK. The Excel-based model took account of the effects of demographic change, anticipated reduction in incidence of heart disease due to primary prevention programmes and the expected improvement in cardiology and cardiac surgery technologies. The model predicted that excess procedures would be required across the region over the next 20 years. Further access study modelling was used to determine the best location for additional tertiary cardiac centres. Further, a commissioning tool was produced that could compare the predicted need, including additional procedures needed to meet waiting list targets, with capacity available from a range of providers. These tools have been used successfully in the Eastern Region to increase the regional revascularization rates from 371 pmp CABG and 322 pmp PTCA in 2000 to planned rates of 453 pmp CABG and 447 pmp PTCA in 2002/2003, to recommend the building of a new tertiary cardiac centre in Essex in the next decade and to inform the commissioning of revascularization rates in three coronary heart disease networks.