Primary Care Physical Therapists' Experiences When Screening for Serious Pathologies Among Their Patients: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: A vital part of the initial examination performed by a physical therapist is to establish whether the patient would benefit from physical therapist intervention. This process includes knowledge about contraindications for treatment and screening for serious pathologies. However, little is known about the physical therapists' views and thoughts about their own practice when screening for serious pathologies. The purpose of this study was to explore the experience gained by physical therapists when screening for serious pathologies among their patients. METHODS: This was a qualitative study based on individual semi-structured interviews with 9 primary care physical therapists. The interviews were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, and generated themes were explained and reported with relevant quotes. RESULTS: Three overall themes were generated: (1) the role of physical therapists in the diagnostic process; (2) responsibility from the individual to the group; and (3) the difficult task of cooperation. The physical therapists described how they relied more on their clinical suspicion than on asking red-flag questions when screening for serious pathologies. They also questioned their differential diagnostic abilities. Finally, they saw a potential to further enhance their confidence in the area by reflecting on the matter with colleagues and by receiving more feedback about their clinical reasoning regarding serious pathologies from general practitioners. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that physical therapists primarily rely on their clinical suspicion when screening for serious pathologies but at the same time are uncertain about their differential diagnostic abilities. IMPACT: These findings can inform future interventions targeting the physical therapists' abilities to detect serious pathology.

Primary care physiotherapists ability to make correct management decisions - is there room for improvement? A mixed method study.

BACKGROUND: With increasing interest in direct access to physiotherapy, it is important to consider the physiotherapists (PTs) ability to make correct management decisions, because identification of differential diagnostic pathologies and timely referral for specialist care is vital for patient safety. The aims of the study were to investigate PTs ability to make correct management decisions in patients presenting with musculoskeletal conditions and to identify explanatory factors associated with this ability. Furthermore, we wanted to explore the PTs views on the identified factors. METHODS: The study was a mixed methods study with an explanatory sequential design consisting of a questionnaire survey and semi-structured interviews. The questionnaire comprised 12 clinical vignettes describing patient scenarios for musculoskeletal conditions, non-critical medical conditions and critical medical conditions. Based on this, the PTs indicated whether the patient should be managed by the PT or were in need of medical referral. Associations between correct decisions and explanatory variables was analyzed by mixed- effects logistic regression. Interviews were performed with nine PTs to explore their reactions to the results. A directed content analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 195 PTs participated in the questionnaire survey and 9 PTs were interviewed. Overall, PTs were more likely to make correct management decisions in the musculoskeletal conditions category, whereas wrong decisions were more often chosen for underlying medical conditions categories. Positive associations between correct management decision in the critical medical category were found for experience: odds ratio (OR) 2.73 (1.33;5.57) and passed quality audit OR 2.90 (1.50;5.58). In the interviews, PTs expressed concerns about the differential diagnostic abilities. They all noted, that experience is immensely important in the clinical reasoning process because the ability to recognise diagnostic patterns evolves over time. Furthermore, the quality audit seems to address and systematize the clinical reasoning process and workflow within the clinics. CONCLUSION: The lack of ability to make correct management decision in critical medical categories and the uncertainties expressed by PT's should raise concern, as direct access to physiotherapy is already well-established and the results indicate that patient safety could be at risk. The findings that experience and passed quality audit was associated with correct management decisions highlights the need for ongoing awareness and education into differential diagnostics.

The prevalence of serious pathology in musculoskeletal physiotherapy patients - a nationwide register-based cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Musculoskeletal conditions are the single largest contributor to years lived with disability worldwide. Most musculoskeletal conditions can be managed in primary care, but for a small proportion of these patients the symptoms are caused by serious pathology. Although the general practitioner usually performs initial screening for serious pathology, evaluation and treatment by physiotherapists are often part of the treatment pathway. It is however unclear, how many patients in primary care physiotherapy have symptoms caused by serious pathology. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of neoplasm, cauda equina syndrome, spinal fracture, infection and inflammatory pathology among patients referred for musculoskeletal physiotherapy. METHODS: The study was a nationwide register-based cohort study. The authors identified all referrals for primary care musculoskeletal physiotherapy in the Danish National Health Insurance Service Register from 2014 to 2017. Records of hospital contacts were extracted from the Danish National Patient Register within 180 days from first physiotherapy contact, identifying all diagnoses of serious pathology. Prevalence estimates of the serious pathology categories were reported. RESULTS: A total of 1568704 courses of treatment were included in the analysis. The overall prevalence of serious pathology was 2.30%. The prevalence of neoplasm was 2.11%, cauda equina syndrome 0.01%, fractures 0.13%, infections 0.01% and inflammatory pathology 0.06%. Higher prevalence's were observed among patients with a previous history of serious pathology, aged above 50 and with comorbidites. CONCLUSIONS: Although serious pathology among patients referred by the General Practitioner to musculoskeletal physiotherapy is rare, the present study found an overall prevalence of serious pathology which exceeded the guideline endorsed prevalence estimates.

Identification of patients with incident cancers using administrative registry data.

INTRODUCTION: On-time identification of incident cancer patients is important in cancer research to ensure quality in cancer treatment and care. Nevertheless, the Danish Cancer Registry (DCR) is updated on an annual basis rather than continuously, and no standardised algorithm exists to enable sampling from administrative data which are updated on a monthly basis. The aim of this study was to develop and validate an algorithm for on-time sampling of incident cancer patients based on administrative data. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was based on registry and questionnaire data from incident cancer patients' general practitioners (GPs). An algorithm for on-time sampling of incident cancer patients was developed and validated in 2008 (12,747 patients) and further developed and validated in 2010 (7,996 patients). Questionnaire data from the GPs and data from the DCR were used as gold standards. The completeness over time of the 2010 cohort was evaluated. RESULTS: Further development of the 2008 algorithm into the 2010 algorithm increased its positive predictive value (PPV) to 95.0%. The PPV of a patient from the 2010 cohort being registered in the DCR was 97.4%. The 2010 algorithm displayed a completeness of 60% in the first month and 95% after four months. CONCLUSION: A valid and cost-saving algorithm for on-time sampling of incident cancer patients has been developed with great potential for research and quality assurance. FUNDING: This work was funded by the Danish Cancer Society and the Novo Nordisk Foundation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: not relevant.

Agreement between patient-reported and doctor-reported patient intervals and date of first symptom presentation in cancer diagnosis - a population-based questionnaire study.

BACKGROUND: The concept of delay in cancer diagnosis has been a scientific issue for decades, and there is still no standardised and validated way to measure the time intervals. One of the intervals that are difficult to measure is the patient interval (i.e. the period from the patient's first symptom until the first presentation to the health care system) because dates of symptom onset and first presentation are difficult to establish precisely. Further, since patients may have another experience of the diagnostic pathway than e.g. the general practitioner (GP), a reasonable question remains whether patients and GPs agree on these important milestones. The objective of this study was to analyse the agreement between patient-reported and GP-reported patient intervals and date of first presentation of cancer-related symptom(s) to the GP. METHODS: On the basis of a cohort study, we included incident cancer patients from the former Aarhus County from 1 September, 2004 to 31 August, 2005. Both patients and GPs reported the length of the patient interval and the date of the first presentation to the GP with a cancer-related symptom measured by self-administered questionnaires. Agreement was measured using agreement-survival plots and Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). RESULTS: There was full agreement between GP- and patient-reported patient intervals in 21.0% of all the cancer cases. In 50.1% of cases, patients and GPs agreed about the patient interval within a margin of one month. There was full agreement between GP- and patient-reported date of first presentation in 37.5% of the cancer cases and within one week in 52.0% of all the cancer cases. Overall, the agreement on the length of the patient interval was poor (CCC=0.513), but better for patients presenting with alarm symptoms. The agreement was moderate between GP- and patient-reported dates of first presentation (CCC=0.924). CONCLUSION: We found that GPs systematically reported a longer patient interval than patients did. We found moderate agreement on reported date of first presentation of symptoms to the GP, meaning that the disagreement in reported patient interval is related to date of first symptom rather than date of first presentation to the GP.

Secondary care intervals before and after the introduction of urgent referral guidelines for suspected cancer in Denmark: a comparative before-after study.

BACKGROUND: Urgent referral for suspected cancer was implemented in Denmark on 1 April 2008 to reduce the secondary care interval (i.e. the time interval from the general practitioner's first referral of a patient to secondary health care until treatment is initiated). However, knowledge about the association between the secondary care interval and urgent referral remains scarce. The aim of this study was to analyse how the secondary care interval changed after the introduction of urgent referral. METHODS: This was a retrospective population-based study of 6,518 incident cancer patients based on questionnaire data from the patients' GPs. Analyses were stratified with patients discharged from Vejle Hospital in one stratum and patients from other hospitals in another because Vejle Hospital initiated urgent referrals several years prior to the national implementation. Further, analyses were stratified according to symptom presentation and whether or not the GP referred the patient on suspicion of cancer. Symptom presentation was defined as with or without alarm symptoms based on GP interpretation of early symptoms. RESULTS: The median secondary care interval decreased after the introduction of urgent referral. Patients discharged from Vejle Hospital tended to have shorter secondary care intervals than patients discharged from other hospitals. The strongest effect was seen in patients with alarm symptoms and those who were referred by their GP on suspicion of cancer. Breast cancer patients from Vejle Hospital experienced an even shorter secondary care interval after the national introduction of urgent referrals. CONCLUSION: Urgent referral had a positive effect on the secondary care interval, and Vejle Hospital remarkably managed to shorten the intervals even further. This finding indicates that the shorter secondary care intervals not only result from the urgent referral guidelines, but also involve other factors.

Coping strategies and patient delay in patients with cancer.

This study examined associations between avoidance and approach coping and patient delay in cancer patients (N = 1024). Approach coping was associated with short appraisal intervals (time from symptom discovery to recognition of symptom seriousness). Avoidance coping was associated with long appraisal intervals when adjusting for covariates. Help-seeking intervals (time from recognition of symptom seriousness to contact to general practitioner) were only associated with approach coping and only when adjusting for the influence of covariates. The results revealed a complex relationship between coping and patient delay and supported that normal processing of health threats implies avoidance and approach coping strategies.

Presenting symptoms of children with cancer: a primary-care population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of how children with cancer present in general practice is sparse. Timely referral from general practice is important to ensure early diagnosis. AIM: To investigate the presenting symptoms and GPs' interpretations of symptoms of children with cancer. DESIGN AND SETTING: A Danish nationwide population-based study including children (<15 years) with an incident cancer diagnosis (January 2007 to December 2010). METHOD: A questionnaire on symptoms and their interpretation was mailed to GPs (n=363). Symptoms were classified according to the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC)-2 classification. RESULTS: GPs' response rate was 87% (315/363) and GPs were involved in the diagnostic process of 253 (80.3%) children. Symptoms were few (2.4 per child) and most fell into the category 'general and unspecified' (71.9%), apart from patients with tumours of the central nervous system (CNS), whose symptoms fell mostly in the category 'neurological' (for example, headache). Symptoms like pain, swelling/lump, or fatigue were reported in 25% of the patients and they were the most commonly reported symptoms. GPs interpreted children's symptoms as alarm symptoms in 20.2%, as serious (that is, not alarm) symptoms in 52.9%, and as vague symptoms in 26.9%. GPs' interpretation varied significantly by diagnosis (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Children with cancer presented with few symptoms in general practice, of which most were 'general and unspecified' symptoms. Only 20% presented alarm symptoms, while 27% presented vague and non-specific symptoms. This low level of alarm symptoms may influence the time from symptom presentation in general practice to final diagnosis.

The initial cancer pathway for children - one-fourth wait more than 3 months.

AIM: To determine the time intervals from symptom to treatment for childhood cancer patients. METHODS: Danish national population-based study. Children (<15 years) with an incident cancer diagnosed from January 2007 to December 2010 were sampled. A total of 376 (68%) parents and 315 (87%) general practitioners (GPs) completed questionnaires on the diagnostic pathway. The time interval was categorized into, patient-, GP-, system-, diagnostic- and total intervals, and as short or long intervals. Factors associated with long time intervals were assessed in a logistic regression model using prevalence ratios (PRs). RESULTS: Girls were almost twice as likely as boys to experience long patient intervals (adjusted PR: 1.8, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1-2.8). The oldest children were more likely than the youngest to experience long total intervals (adjusted PR: 1.9, 95% CI: 1.1-3.3). Cancer type was associated with all time intervals, except GP intervals. Children with bone- and CNS tumours had the longest total intervals (median: 88 days, interquartile interval (IQI): 57-132) vs. (median: 76, IQI: 28-191). Parental education showed a possible association with patient- and GP intervals. CONCLUSION: Time intervals varied by gender, age and cancer type. Parental education may possibly affect the patient- and GP intervals.

[General practice and early cancer diagnosis]. / Almen praksis' rolle i kræftdiagnostikken.

About 85% of cancer patients present with symptoms to general practice. The health care system should be organised in a way that GPs are able to refer patients to timely and early cancer diagnosis. The GP works in an area where symptoms most often are benign and cancer is rare. Only a minority of the symptoms in the population are presented to the GP. The GP must refer many of these knowing that generally the positive predictive value is 2-10%. To be able to ensure the best primary cancer diagnostic pathway we need much more research on symptoms, use of diagnostics and the way to organise this in a health care system where every third citizen will get cancer.

[Symptom presentation in cancer patients in general practice]. / Praesentation af symptomer i almen praksis hos patienter med cancer.

INTRODUCTION: For the majority of cancer patients, the diagnostic investigations begin in general practice. The aim of the study was to investigate for which symptoms cancer patients consulted their general practitioner (GP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: All newly diagnosed cancer patients and their GPs in the County of Aarhus, Denmark, participated in a 1-year questionnaire survey. The GPs answered questions about the patients' first presentation of cancer symptoms and the GPs' interpretation of these symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 2,212 (83%) questionnaires were answered. The total number of reported symptoms was 3,208 corresponding to 1.7 reported symptoms per patient. The majority (57.6%) of patients presented only one symptom. Symptoms varied with the type of cancer. Patients with breast cancer and malignant melanoma mainly presented with diagnosis-specific symptoms. Patients with colorectal, lung and prostate cancer presented diagnosis-specific symptoms (change in bowel habits, cough and bladder dysfunction) as well as more non-specific symptoms (pain, weight loss and fatigue). The GPs interpreted the symptoms as alarm symptoms in 49%, as general symptoms in 24% and as non-cancer specific symptoms in 27% of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: In general practice, incident cancer patients often present with few and non-cancer specific symptoms. The fact that only half of the patients presented with alarm symptoms complicates the GPs' diagnostic work-up and the use of fast track for suspected cancer. Therefore, there is a need for alternative referral pathways for cancer patients with non-cancer specific symptoms.

[General practitioners' experience from systematic review of patient cases as a learning vehicle in general practice]. / Laegers erfaringer med systematiske gennemgange af patientforløb som laeringsmetode i almen praksis.

The study shows that GPs perceive systematic reviews of patient cases as potential learning vehicles. This is in line with adult learning theories, which argue that professional capability is best enhanced by situating learning in real-life contexts. This paper argues that we should think pragmatically when developing learning methods, and strengthen future efforts to develop methods that ensure reliable learning based on reviews of patient cases.

Learning based on patient case reviews: an interview study.

BACKGROUND: Recent theories on adult learning recommend that learning is situated in real-life contexts. Learning is considered a continuous process in which every new experience builds on, and integrates with, previously accumulated experiences. Reviewing and reflecting on patient cases is in line with this learning approach. There has, however, been remarkably little research into how patient cases might be applied in professional education. The purpose of this article is to present family physicians' perceptions of the learning process initiated by reviewing patient cases. METHODS: Thirteen family physicians, who had all participated in a large project on cancer diagnosis in family practice (the CAP-project), currently carried out at the Research Unit for General Practice, University of Aarhus were interviewed on their experiences of reviewing patient cases. In the CAP-project family physicians (n = 467, 81%) in the County of Aarhus (640 000 inhabitants) completed 2,212 (83%) detailed questionnaires on all newly diagnosed patients with cancer encountered in their practices during a one year period (2004-2005). In order to complete the questionnaire the family physicians were required to perform a systematic case review of each patient: they had to consult their records to provide dates of symptom-presentation, investigations and treatments initiated, and reflect on previous encounters with the patients to give detailed information on his/hers knowledge of the patients' care seeking behaviour, mental health and risk factors.The purpose of this article is to present indebt interview-data on family physicians' perceptions of the learning process initiated by reviewing patient cases, and their evaluations of using patient case reviews as a learning method in family practice. RESULTS: The process of reflection initiated by reviewing patient cases enabled family physicians to reconsider their clinical work procedures which potentially supported the transition from individual competence to personal capability. According to the physicians, they were not only able to identify needed changes, some reported that they were able to transform these ideas into action and do things more effectively. According to our data this transition takes place, because the learning processes initiated were based on real life experiences which equally initiated reflections on what to improve, as well as how to improve their work. CONCLUSION: Patient case reviews initiate reflective processes providing feedback about performance in real life situations. Family physicians are in favour of patient case reviews as a learning method, because it embraces the complexities they encounter in their daily practice and is based on personal experiences.

Socioeconomic patient characteristics predict delay in cancer diagnosis: a Danish cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Delay in cancer diagnosis may be important for cancer prognosis. Large individual variations in the duration of delay have been observed. This study examines whether patients' socioeconomic characteristics are predictors of long patient-, doctor- and system-related delay in cancer diagnosis. METHODS: Danish population-based cohort study. From September 2004 to September 2005, newly diagnosed cancer patients were enrolled from administrative registries. A total of 467 general practitioners in the County of Aarhus, Denmark, completed questionnaires on 2,212 cancer patients' diagnostic pathways. A total of 1,252 cancer patients filled in questionnaires on their socioeconomic characteristics (e.g. marital status, education, occupation, household income and fortune). Delay was categorised as short or long based on quartiles. Predictors of long delay were assessed in a logistic regression model using odds ratios (ORs) as a proxy of relative risks. RESULTS: In regard to patient delay, retired female patients experienced shorter delays (OR 0.35, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) 0.13 to 0.98) than employed female patients, while female smokers experienced longer delays (OR 2.42, 95%CI 1.21 to 4.85) than female non-smokers. In regard to doctor delay, female patients with a large household fortune experienced shorter delays (OR 0.07, 95%CI 0.01 to 0.45) than economically less privileged female patients. Well-educated men experienced shorter delays (OR 0.40, 95%CI 0.16 to 1.00) than men with short education. Male patients experienced longer doctor delays (OR 2.11, 95%CI 1.11 to 4.02) than women when gender-specific cancers were excluded. In regard to system delay, female patients with a large household fortune experienced shorter delays (OR 0.46, 95%CI 0.21 to 0.99) than economically less privileged women, while female patients with a high alcohol intake experienced longer delays (OR 2.82, 95%CI 1.18 to 6.72) than women with an average intake. CONCLUSION: We found socioeconomic predictors of delay that allow us to hypothesize social inequalities in the distribution of delay, but, in general, only a few socioeconomic variables predicted delay in cancer diagnosis. Future research should examine a broader array of patients' personal characteristics.