Informing evidence-based policy during the COVID-19 pandemic and recovery period: learning from a national evidence centre.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated the vital need for research to inform policy decision-making and save lives. The Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre (WCEC) was established in March 2021 and funded for two years, to make evidence about the impact of the pandemic and ongoing research priorities for Wales available and actionable to policy decision-makers, service leads and the public. OBJECTIVES: We describe the approaches we developed and our experiences, challenges and future vision. PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION: The centre operated with a core team, including a public partnership group, and six experienced research groups as collaborating partners. Our rapid evidence delivery process had five stages: 1. Stakeholder engagement (continued throughout all stages); 2. Research question prioritisation; 3. Bespoke rapid evidence review methodology in a phased approach; 4. Rapid primary research; and 5. Knowledge Mobilisation to ensure the evidence was available for decision-makers. MAIN ACHIEVEMENTS: Between March 2021-23 we engaged with 44 stakeholder groups, completed 35 Rapid Evidence Reviews, six Rapid Evidence Maps and 10 Rapid Evidence Summaries. We completed four primary research studies, with three published in peer reviewed journals, and seven ongoing. Our evidence informed policy decision-making and was cited in 19 Welsh Government papers. These included pandemic infection control measures, the Action Plan to tackle gender inequalities, and Education Renew and Reform policy. We conducted 24 Welsh Government evidence briefings and three public facing symposia. POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Strong engagement with stakeholder groups, a phased rapid evidence review approach, and primary research to address key gaps in current knowledge enabled high-quality efficient, evidence outputs to be delivered to help inform Welsh policy decision-making during the pandemic. We learn from these processes to continue to deliver evidence from March 2023 as the Health and Care Research Wales Evidence Centre, with a broader remit of health and social care, to help inform policy and practice decisions during the recovery phase and beyond.

Tensions in primary care cancer detection: An embedded qualitative intervention development study.

BACKGROUND: UK cancer mortality is worse than many other high-income countries, partly due to diagnostic delays in primary care. AIM: To understand beliefs and behaviour of GPs, and systems of general practice teams, to inform the Think Cancer! intervention development. DESIGN AND SETTING: An embedded qualitative study guided by behaviour change models (COM-B and TDF) in primary care in Wales, UK. METHOD: Twenty qualitative, semi-structured telephone interviews with GPs and four face-to-face focus groups with practice teams. Analysis used Framework, results were mapped to multiple, overlapping components of COM-B and TDF. RESULTS: Three themes illustrate (1) complex, multi-level referral considerations facing GPs and practice teams, (2) external influences and constraints, (3) the role of practice systems and culture. Tensions emerged between individual considerations of GPs (Capability, Motivation) and context-dependent external pressures (Opportunity). Detecting cancer was guided not only by external requirements, but also by motivational factors GPs described as part of their cancer diagnostics process. External influences on the diagnosis process often resulted from the primary-secondary care interface and social pressures. GPs adapted their behaviour to deal with this disconnect. Positive practice culture and supportive practice-based systems ameliorated these tensions and complexity. CONCLUSION: By exploring individual GP behaviours together with practice systems and culture we contribute new understandings on how cancer diagnosis operates in primary care and how delays can be improved. We highlight commonly overlooked dynamics and tensions, experienced by GPs as a tension between individual decision-making (Capability, Motivation) and external considerations such as pressures in secondary care (Opportunity).

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on incidence of long-term conditions in Wales: a population data linkage study using primary and secondary care health records.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has directly and indirectly had an impact on health service provision owing to surges and sustained pressures on the system. The effects of these pressures on the management of long-term or chronic conditions are not fully understood. AIM: To explore the effects of COVID-19 on the recorded incidence of 17 long-term conditions. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was an observational retrospective population data linkage study on the population of Wales using primary and secondary care data within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank. METHOD: Monthly rates of new diagnosis between 2000 and 2021 are presented for each long-term condition. Incidence rates post-2020 were compared with expected rates predicted using time series modelling of pre-2020 trends. The proportion of annual incidence is presented by sociodemographic factors: age, sex, social deprivation, ethnicity, frailty, and learning disability. RESULTS: A total of 5 476 012 diagnoses from 2 257 992 individuals are included. Incidence rates from 2020 to 2021 were lower than mean expected rates across all conditions. The largest relative deficit in incidence was in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease corresponding to 343 (95% confidence interval = 230 to 456) undiagnosed patients per 100 000 population, followed by depression, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, anxiety disorders, and asthma. A GP practice of 10 000 patients might have over 400 undiagnosed long-term conditions. No notable differences between sociodemographic profiles of post- and pre-2020 incidences were observed. CONCLUSION: There is a potential backlog of undiagnosed patients with multiple long-term conditions. Resources are required to tackle anticipated workload as part of COVID-19 recovery, particularly in primary care.

Diagnostic pathways for breast cancer in 10 International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) jurisdictions: an international comparative cohort study based on questionnaire and registry data.

OBJECTIVES: A growing body of evidence suggests longer time between symptom onset and start of treatment affects breast cancer prognosis. To explore this association, the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership Module 4 examined differences in breast cancer diagnostic pathways in 10 jurisdictions across Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK. SETTING: Primary care in 10 jurisdictions. PARTICIPANT: Data were collated from 3471 women aged >40 diagnosed for the first time with breast cancer and surveyed between 2013 and 2015. Data were supplemented by feedback from their primary care physicians (PCPs), cancer treatment specialists and available registry data. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient, primary care, diagnostic and treatment intervals. RESULTS: Overall, 56% of women reported symptoms to primary care, with 66% first noticing lumps or breast changes. PCPs reported 77% presented with symptoms, of whom 81% were urgently referred with suspicion of cancer (ranging from 62% to 92%; Norway and Victoria). Ranges for median patient, primary care and diagnostic intervals (days) for symptomatic patients were 3-29 (Denmark and Sweden), 0-20 (seven jurisdictions and Ontario) and 8-29 (Denmark and Wales). Ranges for median treatment and total intervals (days) for all patients were 15-39 (Norway, Victoria and Manitoba) and 4-78 days (Sweden, Victoria and Ontario). The 10% longest waits ranged between 101 and 209 days (Sweden and Ontario). CONCLUSIONS: Large international differences in breast cancer diagnostic pathways exist, suggesting some jurisdictions develop more effective strategies to optimise pathways and reduce time intervals. Targeted awareness interventions could also facilitate more timely diagnosis of breast cancer.

Diagnostic routes and time intervals for ovarian cancer in nine international jurisdictions; findings from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP).

BACKGROUND: International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership Module 4 reports the first international comparison of ovarian cancer (OC) diagnosis routes and intervals (symptom onset to treatment start), which may inform previously reported variations in survival and stage. METHODS: Data were collated from 1110 newly diagnosed OC patients aged >40 surveyed between 2013 and 2015 across five countries (51-272 per jurisdiction), their primary-care physicians (PCPs) and cancer treatment specialists, supplement by treatment records or clinical databases. Diagnosis routes and time interval differences using quantile regression with reference to Denmark (largest survey response) were calculated. RESULTS: There were no significant jurisdictional differences in the proportion diagnosed with symptoms on the Goff Symptom Index (53%; P = 0.179) or National Institute for Health and Care Excellence NG12 guidelines (62%; P = 0.946). Though the main diagnosis route consistently involved primary-care presentation (63-86%; P = 0.068), onward urgent referral rates varied significantly (29-79%; P < 0.001). In most jurisdictions, diagnostic intervals were generally shorter and other intervals, in particular, treatment longer compared to Denmark. CONCLUSION: This study highlights key intervals in the diagnostic pathway where improvements could be made. It provides the opportunity to consider the systems and approaches across different jurisdictions that might allow for more timely ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment.

Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on incidence of long-term conditions in Welsh residents: a population linkage study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic had direct and indirect effects on health. Indirect effects on long term medical conditions (LTCs) are unclear. We examined trends in recorded incidences of LTCs and quantified differences between expected rates and observed rates from 2020 onwards. METHODS: This is a population data linkage study using primary and secondary care data within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank. We included data of Welsh residents diagnosed with any of 17 identified LTCs for the first time between Jan 1, 2000, and Dec 31, 2021. LTC's include mental health conditions, respiratory diseases, and heart conditions among others, generally chosen in line with the Quality and Outcomes Framework. The primary outcome was incidence rates (monthly number of new cases per 100 000 population). For each LTC, we did interrupted time series analysis of incidence rates from 2015 to 2021. Expected rates from between Jan 1, 2020, to Dec 31, 2021, were predicted using overall trends and seasonal patterns from the preceding 5 years and compared with observed rates. FINDINGS: We included 5 476 012 diagnoses from 2 257 992 individuals diagnosed with at least one LTC between Jan 1, 2000, to Dec 31, 2021. Across multiple long-term conditions, there was an abrupt reduction in observed incidence of new diagnoses from March to April 2020, followed by a general increase in incidence towards prepandemic rates. The conditions with the largest percentage difference between the observed and expected incidence rates in 2020 and 2021 were chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (38·4% lower than expected), depression (28·3% lower), hypertension (25·5% lower), and anxiety disorders (24·9% lower). The condition with the largest absolute difference between observed and expected incidence rates was anxiety disorders, with 830 per 100 000 less in 2020 and 2021 compared with observed rates. INTERPRETATION: The reduction in incidence rates of LTCs suggests an underreporting of LTCs, especially during 2020 and early 2021. The emergence of these yet undiagnosed cases could result in a surge of new patients in the near future. FUNDING: This work was supported by the Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre, funded by Health and Care Research Wales.

'Function First': how to promote physical activity and physical function in people with long-term conditions managed in primary care? A study combining realist and co-design methods.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a taxonomy of interventions and a programme theory explaining how interventions improve physical activity and function in people with long-term conditions managed in primary care. To co-design a prototype intervention informed by the programme theory. DESIGN: Realist synthesis combining evidence from a wide range of rich and relevant literature with stakeholder views. Resulting context, mechanism and outcome statements informed co-design and knowledge mobilisation workshops with stakeholders to develop a primary care service innovation. RESULTS: A taxonomy was produced, including 13 categories of physical activity interventions for people with long-term conditions. ABRIDGED REALIST PROGRAMME THEORY: Routinely addressing physical activity within consultations is dependent on a reinforcing practice culture, and targeted resources, with better coordination, will generate more opportunities to address low physical activity. The adaptation of physical activity promotion to individual needs and preferences of people with long-term conditions helps affect positive patient behaviour change. Training can improve knowledge, confidence and capability of practice staff to better promote physical activity. Engagement in any physical activity promotion programme will depend on the degree to which it makes sense to patients and professions, and is seen as trustworthy. CO-DESIGN: The programme theory informed the co-design of a prototype intervention to: improve physical literacy among practice staff; describe/develop the role of a physical activity advisor who can encourage the use of local opportunities to be more active; and provide materials to support behaviour change. CONCLUSIONS: Previous physical activity interventions in primary care have had limited effect. This may be because they have only partially addressed factors emerging in our programme theory. The co-designed prototype intervention aims to address all elements of this emergent theory, but needs further development and consideration alongside current schemes and contexts (including implications relevant to COVID-19), and testing in a future study. The integration of realist and co-design methods strengthened this study.

Protocol for a feasibility study incorporating a randomised pilot trial with an embedded process evaluation and feasibility economic analysis of ThinkCancer!: a primary care intervention to expedite cancer diagnosis in Wales.

BACKGROUND: Compared to the rest of Europe, the UK has relatively poor cancer outcomes, with late diagnosis and a slow referral process being major contributors. General practitioners (GPs) are often faced with patients presenting with a multitude of non-specific symptoms that could be cancer. Safety netting can be used to manage diagnostic uncertainty by ensuring patients with vague symptoms are appropriately monitored, which is now even more crucial due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and its major impact on cancer referrals. The ThinkCancer! workshop is an educational behaviour change intervention aimed at the whole general practice team, designed to improve primary care approaches to ensure timely diagnosis of cancer. The workshop will consist of teaching and awareness sessions, the appointment of a Safety Netting Champion and the development of a bespoke Safety Netting Plan and has been adapted so it can be delivered remotely. This study aims to assess the feasibility of the ThinkCancer! intervention for a future definitive randomised controlled trial. METHODS: The ThinkCancer! study is a randomised, multisite feasibility trial, with an embedded process evaluation and feasibility economic analysis. Twenty-three to 30 general practices will be recruited across Wales, randomised in a ratio of 2:1 of intervention versus control who will follow usual care. The workshop will be delivered by a GP educator and will be adapted iteratively throughout the trial period. Baseline practice characteristics will be collected via questionnaire. We will also collect primary care intervals (PCI), 2-week wait (2WW) referral rates, conversion rates and detection rates at baseline and 6 months post-randomisation. Participant feedback, researcher reflections and economic costings will be collected following each workshop. A process evaluation will assess implementation using an adapted Normalisation Measure Development (NoMAD) questionnaire and qualitative interviews. An economic feasibility analysis will inform a future economic evaluation. DISCUSSION: This study will allow us to test and further develop a novel evidenced-based complex intervention aimed at general practice teams to expedite the diagnosis of cancer in primary care. The results from this study will inform the future design of a full-scale definitive phase III trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04823559 .

'Function First-Be Active, Stay Independent'-promoting physical activity and physical function in people with long-term conditions by primary care: a protocol for a realist synthesis with embedded co-production and co-design.

INTRODUCTION: People with long-term conditions typically have reduced physical functioning, are less physically active and therefore become less able to live independently and do the things they enjoy. However, assessment and promotion of physical function and physical activity is not part of routine management in primary care. This project aims to develop evidence-based recommendations about how primary care can best help people to become more physically active in order to maintain and improve their physical function, thus promoting independence. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study takes a realist synthesis approach, following RAMESES guidance, with embedded co-production and co-design. Stage 1 will develop initial programme theories about physical activity and physical function for people with long-term conditions, based on a review of the scientific and grey literature, and two multisector stakeholder workshops using LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY®. Stage 2 will involve focused literature searching, data extraction and synthesis to provide evidence to support or refute the initial programme theories. Searches for evidence will focus on physical activity interventions involving the assessment of physical function which are relevant to primary care. We will describe 'what works', 'for whom' and 'in what circumstances' and develop conjectured programme theories using context, mechanism and outcome configurations. Stage 3 will test and refine these theories through individual stakeholder interviews. The resulting theory-driven recommendations will feed into Stage 4 which will involve three sequential co-design stakeholder workshops in which practical ideas for service innovation in primary care will be developed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Healthcare and Medical Sciences Academic Ethics Committee (Reference 2018-16308) and NHS Wales Research Ethics Committee 5 approval (References 256 729 and 262726) have been obtained. A knowledge mobilisation event will address issues relevant to wider implementation of the intervention and study findings. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publications, conference presentations and formal and informal reports. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018103027.

The development of the Primary Care Clusters Multidimensional Assessment (PCCMA): A mixed-methods study.

A strong primary care (PC) system is essential for an efficient and high-quality healthcare service. Many countries have adopted a model of PC that encourages different healthcare providers to work together, at scale, in multidisciplinary/multiagency teams (PC clusters). The aim of the present work was to develop a quantitative instrument for the systematic and comprehensive assessment of PC clusters. This was a non-experimental, mixed-methods study grouping four work packages (WP), and involving PC cluster leads and a wide range of key stakeholders from across Wales. Interviews with 22 PC cluster leads (34 %) investigated the clusters' functioning (WP1). A systematic review identified relevant PC assessment frameworks and instruments (WP2). An expert group reviewed the evidence and drafted the new assessment tool, further evaluated and amended in two stakeholder workshops (WP3). Thirty-eight cluster leads (62 %) completed the newly developed online assessment (WP4). The final instrument consisted of 53 indicators, across 11 systemic dimensions of PC and produced a comprehensive assessment of the functioning of PC clusters in Wales. This rigorous early development of an innovative instrument to evaluate PC at a scaled-up (cluster) level (particularly in the format of a 360-degree assessment) can inform healthcare policy decisions regarding the expansion and ongoing adjustment of the model in response to local needs and challenges.

Time intervals and routes to diagnosis for lung cancer in 10 jurisdictions: cross-sectional study findings from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP).

OBJECTIVE: Differences in time intervals to diagnosis and treatment between jurisdictions may contribute to previously reported differences in stage at diagnosis and survival. The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership Module 4 reports the first international comparison of routes to diagnosis and time intervals from symptom onset until treatment start for patients with lung cancer. DESIGN: Newly diagnosed patients with lung cancer, their primary care physicians (PCPs) and cancer treatment specialists (CTSs) were surveyed in Victoria (Australia), Manitoba and Ontario (Canada), Northern Ireland, England, Scotland and Wales (UK), Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Using Wales as the reference jurisdiction, the 50th, 75th and 90th percentiles for intervals were compared using quantile regression adjusted for age, gender and comorbidity. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive newly diagnosed patients with lung cancer, aged ≥40 years, diagnosed between October 2012 and March 2015 were identified through cancer registries. Of 10 203 eligible symptomatic patients contacted, 2631 (27.5%) responded and 2143 (21.0%) were included in the analysis. Data were also available from 1211 (56.6%) of their PCPs and 643 (37.0%) of their CTS. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Interval lengths (days; primary), routes to diagnosis and symptoms (secondary). RESULTS: With the exception of Denmark (-49 days), in all other jurisdictions, the median adjusted total interval from symptom onset to treatment, for respondents diagnosed in 2012-2015, was similar to that of Wales (116 days). Denmark had shorter median adjusted primary care interval (-11 days) than Wales (20 days); Sweden had shorter (-20) and Manitoba longer (+40) median adjusted diagnostic intervals compared with Wales (45 days). Denmark (-13), Manitoba (-11), England (-9) and Northern Ireland (-4) had shorter median adjusted treatment intervals than Wales (43 days). The differences were greater for the 10% of patients who waited the longest. Based on overall trends, jurisdictions could be grouped into those with trends of reduced, longer and similar intervals to Wales. The proportion of patients diagnosed following presentation to the PCP ranged from 35% to 75%. CONCLUSION: There are differences between jurisdictions in interval to treatment, which are magnified in patients with lung cancer who wait the longest. The data could help jurisdictions develop more focused lung cancer policy and targeted clinical initiatives. Future analysis will explore if these differences in intervals impact on stage or survival.

The time course and mechanisms of change in biomarkers of joint metabolism in response to acute exercise and chronic training in physiologic and pathological conditions.

PURPOSE: The benefits of exercise across the lifespan and for a wide spectrum of health and diseases are well known. However, there remains less clarity as to the effects of both acute and chronic exercise on joint health. Serum biomarkers of joint metabolism are sensitive to change and have the potential to differentiate between normal and adverse adaptations to acute and chronic load. Therefore, the primary objective of this review is to evaluate how serum biomarkers can inform our understanding of how exercise affects joint metabolism. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was completed to identify joint biomarkers previously used to investigate acute and chronic exercise training. RESULTS: Identified biomarkers included those related to joint cartilage, bone, synovium, synovial fluid, and inflammation. However, current research has largely focused on the response of serum cartilage oligomeric matrix protein (COMP) to acute loading in healthy young individuals. Studies demonstrate how acute loading transiently increases serum COMP (i.e., cartilage metabolism), which is mostly dependent on the duration of exercise. This response does not appear to be associated with any lasting deleterious changes, cartilage degradation, or osteoarthritis. CONCLUSION: Several promising biomarkers for assessing joint metabolism exist and may in future enhance our understanding of the physiological response to acute and chronic exercise. Defining 'normal' and 'abnormal' biomarker responses to exercise and methodological standardisation would greatly improve the potential of research in this area to understand mechanisms and inform practice.

A lifestyle management programme focused on exercise, diet and physiotherapy support for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis and a body mass index over 35: A qualitative study.

The Lifestyle Management Programme (LMP) is an exercise and weight management programme with physiotherapy support for people with hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) and a body mass index (BMI) over 35. This qualitative study explored views and experiences of the LMP among patients and professionals, and offers insight for future programmes. Five referring clinicians and six delivering professionals participated in focus groups. Three referring GPs and nine patients who attended the LMP took part in semi-structured interviews. Topics included: referral, reasons for taking up and continuing the programme or not, and experiences and outcomes. Framework method was used to analyse the qualitative data. Overall, patients and professionals valued the multidisciplinary nature of the LMP. However, professionals explained feeling guilty about delaying patients on the orthopaedic waiting list and believed that the programme should be redirected to those with less severe OA and a lower BMI. Referring clinicians differed in their interpretation of the referral criteria and expressed varying levels of autonomy when making referrals. Patients referred after a consultation with their general practitioner appeared to be more satisfied with the referral process. Patients were also encouraged by the opportunity to improve health, their likelihood of surgery and social benefits. However, patients were discouraged by inconvenience, cost, lack of readiness to change and embarrassment. In conclusion, shared decision-making about lifestyle management without delaying orthopaedic opinion is preferable, and more psychological support may increase participation. Importantly, the programme may be better focused on rehabilitation for patients with a lower BMI and less severe symptoms.

Development of an intervention to expedite cancer diagnosis through primary care: a protocol.

BACKGROUND: GPs can play an important role in achieving earlier cancer diagnosis to improve patient outcomes, for example through prompt use of the urgent suspected cancer referral pathway. Barriers to early diagnosis include individual practitioner variation in knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, professional expectations, and norms. AIM: This programme of work (Wales Interventions and Cancer Knowledge about Early Diagnosis [WICKED]) will develop a behaviour change intervention to expedite diagnosis through primary care and contribute to improved cancer outcomes. DESIGN & SETTING: Non-experimental mixed-method study with GPs and primary care practice teams from Wales. METHOD: Four work packages will inform the development of the behaviour change intervention. Work package 1 will identify relevant evidence-based interventions (systematic review of reviews) and will determine why interventions do or do not work, for whom, and in what circumstances (realist review). Work package 2 will assess cancer knowledge, attitudes, and behaviour of GPs, as well as primary care teams' perspectives on cancer referral and investigation (GP survey, discrete choice experiment [DCE], interviews, and focus groups). Work package 3 will synthesise findings from earlier work packages using the behaviour change wheel as an overarching theoretical framework to guide intervention development. Work package 4 will test the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention, and determine methods for measuring costs and effects of subsequent behaviour change in a randomised feasibility trial. RESULTS: The findings will inform the design of a future effectiveness trial, with concurrent economic evaluation, aimed at earlier diagnosis. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive, evidence-based programme will develop a complex GP behaviour change intervention to expedite the diagnosis of symptomatic cancer, and may be applicable to countries with similar healthcare systems.

Diagnostic routes and time intervals for patients with colorectal cancer in 10 international jurisdictions; findings from a cross-sectional study from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP).

OBJECTIVE: International differences in colorectal cancer (CRC) survival and stage at diagnosis have been reported previously. They may be linked to differences in time intervals and routes to diagnosis. The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership Module 4 (ICBP M4) reports the first international comparison of routes to diagnosis for patients with CRC and the time intervals from symptom onset until the start of treatment. Data came from patients in 10 jurisdictions across six countries (Canada, the UK, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Australia). DESIGN: Patients with CRC were identified via cancer registries. Data on symptomatic and screened patients were collected; questionnaire data from patients' primary care physicians and specialists, as well as information from treatment records or databases, supplemented patient data from the questionnaires. Routes to diagnosis and the key time intervals were described, as were between-jurisdiction differences in time intervals, using quantile regression. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 14 664 eligible patients with CRC diagnosed between 2013 and 2015 were identified, of which 2866 were included in the analyses. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Interval lengths in days (primary), reported patient symptoms (secondary). RESULTS: The main route to diagnosis for patients was symptomatic presentation and the most commonly reported symptom was 'bleeding/blood in stool'. The median intervals between jurisdictions ranged from: 21 to 49 days (patient); 0 to 12 days (primary care); 27 to 76 days (diagnostic); and 77 to 168 days (total, from first symptom to treatment start). Including screen-detected cases did not significantly alter the overall results. CONCLUSION: ICBP M4 demonstrates important differences in time intervals between 10 jurisdictions internationally. The differences may justify efforts to reduce intervals in some jurisdictions.

Health Professionals' Perceptions of the Effects of Exercise on Joint Health in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients.

OBJECTIVES: Although exercise is an important factor in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), research indicates that patients perceive that health professionals (HPs) are uncertain about the place of exercise in treatment and its relationship with joint damage. The present study investigated the perceptions of HPs regarding the effects of exercise on joint health in RA patients. METHODS: A questionnaire investigating perceptions of exercise and joint health was distributed via professional networks and websites. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to analyse questionnaire data and develop a focus group interview guide. Focus groups were conducted with multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) of rheumatology HPs and analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: A total of 137 rheumatology HPs (95 female; 27-65 years of age) completed questionnaires. CFA showed that a four-factor model provided a marginally acceptable fit. Analysis of four focus groups (n = 24; 19 female; 30-60 years of age) identified five themes relating to HPs' perceptions of exercise and joint health in RA patients: 'Exercise is beneficial', 'Concerns about damage to joints', 'Patients have barriers to exercise', 'HP knowledge differs' and 'Patients may think service delivery is vague'. CONCLUSIONS: HPs were highly aware of the benefits and importance of exercise for RA patients. However, to remove the patient perception that HPs lack certainty and clarity regarding exercise it is important to ensure: (i) consistent promotion of exercise across the whole MDT; (ii) clear provision of information regarding rest, joint protection and exercise; (iii) HP education to ensure consistent, accurate knowledge, and understanding of the potential for conflicting advice when promoting exercise as part of an MDT. Copy © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Patient perspectives on delays in diagnosis and treatment of cancer: a qualitative analysis of free-text data.

BACKGROUND: Earlier cancer diagnosis is crucial in improving cancer survival. The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership Module 4 (ICBP4) is a quantitative survey study that explores the reasons for delays in diagnosis and treatment of breast, colorectal, lung, and ovarian cancer. To further understand the associated diagnostic processes, it is also important to explore the patient perspectives expressed in the free-text comments. AIM: To use the free-text data provided by patients completing the ICBP4 survey to augment the understanding of patients' perspectives of their diagnostic journey. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative analysis of the free-text data collected in Wales between October 2013 and December 2014 as part of the ICBP4 survey. Newly-diagnosed patients with either breast, ovarian, colorectal, or lung cancer were identified from registry data and then invited by their GPs to participate in the survey. METHOD: A thematic framework was used to analyse the free-text comments provided at the end of the ICBP4 survey. Of the 905 patients who returned a questionnaire, 530 included comments. RESULTS: The free-text data provided information about patients' perspectives of the diagnostic journey. Analysis identified factors that acted as either barriers or facilitators at different stages of the diagnostic process. Some factors, such as screening, doctor-patient familiarity, and private treatment, acted as both barriers and facilitators depending on the context. CONCLUSION: Factors identified in this study help to explain how existing models of cancer diagnosis (for example, the Pathways to Treatment Model) work in practice. It is important that clinicians are aware of how these factors may interact with individual clinical cases and either facilitate, or act as a barrier to, subsequent cancer diagnosis. Understanding and implementing this knowledge into clinical practice may result in quicker cancer diagnoses.

An investigation of routes to cancer diagnosis in 10 international jurisdictions, as part of the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership: survey development and implementation.

OBJECTIVES: This paper describes the methods used in the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership Module 4 Survey (ICBPM4) which examines time intervals and routes to cancer diagnosis in 10 jurisdictions. We present the study design with defining and measuring time intervals, identifying patients with cancer, questionnaire development, data management and analyses. DESIGN AND SETTING: Recruitment of participants to the ICBPM4 survey is based on cancer registries in each jurisdiction. Questionnaires draw on previous instruments and have been through a process of cognitive testing and piloting in three jurisdictions followed by standardised translation and adaptation. Data analysis focuses on comparing differences in time intervals and routes to diagnosis in the jurisdictions. PARTICIPANTS: Our target is 200 patients with symptomatic breast, lung, colorectal and ovarian cancer in each jurisdiction. Patients are approached directly or via their primary care physician (PCP). Patients' PCPs and cancer treatment specialists (CTSs) are surveyed, and 'data rules' are applied to combine and reconcile conflicting information. Where CTS information is unavailable, audit information is sought from treatment records and databases. MAIN OUTCOMES: Reliability testing of the patient questionnaire showed that agreement was complete (κ=1) in four items and substantial (κ=0.8, 95% CI 0.333 to 1) in one item. The identification of eligible patients is sufficient to meet the targets for breast, lung and colorectal cancer. Initial patient and PCP survey response rates from the UK and Sweden are comparable with similar published surveys. Data collection was completed in early 2016 for all cancer types. CONCLUSION: An international questionnaire-based survey of patients with cancer, PCPs and CTSs has been developed and launched in 10 jurisdictions. ICBPM4 will help to further understand international differences in cancer survival by comparing time intervals and routes to cancer diagnosis.

The Effects of Aerobic and Resistance Exercise on Markers of Large Joint Health in Stable Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: Exercise is beneficial for people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, patients and health professionals have expressed concern about the possible detrimental effects of exercise on joint health. The present study investigated the acute and chronic effects of high-intensity, low-impact aerobic and resistance exercise on markers of large joint health in RA. METHODS: Eight RA patients and eight healthy, matched control (CTL) participants performed 30 minutes' high-intensity, low-impact aerobic and lower-body resistance exercise, one week apart. Primary outcome measures assessing joint health were serum cartilage oligomeric matrix protein (sCOMP) and knee joint synovial inflammation (Doppler ultrasound colour fraction; CF). These measures were taken at baseline, immediately after and 0.5, one, two, six and 24 hours post-exercise. In a separate study, nine RA patients completed eight weeks of progressive exercise training. The same outcome measures were reassessed at baseline, and at one hour post-exercise of training weeks 0, 1, 4 and 8. RESULTS: RA patients showed higher overall sCOMP [RA: 1,347 ± 421, CTL: 1,189 ± 562 ng/mL; p < 0.05; effect size (ES) = 0.32] and CF when scanned longitudinally (RA: 0.489 ± 0.30 × 10(-3) , CTL: 0.101 ± 0.13 × 10(-3) ; p < 0.01; ES = 1.73) and transversely (RA: 0.938 ± 0.69 × 10(-3) , CTL: 0.199 ± 0.36 × 10(-3) ; p < 0.01; ES = 1.33) than CTL. However, no acute effects on joint health were observed post-exercise. Similarly, no chronic effects were observed over eight weeks of combined aerobic and resistance training in RA, with positive effects on physical fitness and function. CONCLUSIONS: RA patients on stable treatment with low disease activity were able to perform an individually prescribed high-intensity, low-impact aerobic and resistance exercise without changes in markers of large joint health. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.