Is the early identification and referral of suspected head and neck cancers by community pharmacists feasible? A qualitative interview study exploring the views of patients in North East England.

INTRODUCTION: Head and neck cancer (HNC) is the eighth most common cancer in the United Kingdom. Survival rates improve when the cancer is diagnosed at an early stage, highlighting a key need to identify at-risk patients. This study aimed to explore opportunistic HNC identification and referral by community pharmacists (CPs) using a symptom-based risk assessment calculator, from the perspective of patients with a diagnosis of HNC. METHODS: Purposive sampling was used to recruit patients from the HNC pathway in three large teaching hospitals in Northern England. Qualitative methodology was used to collect data through an iterative series of semistructured telephone interviews. Framework analysis was utilised to identify key themes. RESULTS: Four main themes were constructed through the analytic process: (1) HNC presentation and seeking help; (2) the role of the CP; (3) public perception of HNC and (4) the role of a symptom-based risk calculator. Participants agreed that CPs could play a role in the identification and referral of suspected HNCs, but there were concerns about access as patients frequently only encounter the medicine counter assistant when they visit the pharmacy. HNC symptoms are frequently attributed to common or minor conditions initially and therefore considered not urgent, leading to delays in seeking help. While there is public promotion for some cancers, there is little known about HNC. Early presentation of HNC can be quite variable, therefore raising awareness would help. The use of a symptom-based risk calculator was considered beneficial if it enabled earlier referral and diagnosis. Participants suggested that it would also be useful if the public were made aware of it and could self-assess their symptoms. CONCLUSION: In principle, CPs could play a role in the identification and referral of HNC, but there was uncertainty as to how the intervention would work. Future research is needed to develop an intervention that would facilitate earlier identification and referral of HNC while not disrupting CP work and that would promote HNC and the risk calculator more widely. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) was integrated throughout the project. Initially, the proposal was discussed during a Cancer Head and Neck Group Experience (CHANGE) PPIE meeting. CHANGE was set up to support HNC research in 2018. The group is composed of seven members (four female, three male) with an age range of 50-71 years, who were diagnosed at Sunderland Royal Hospital. A patient representative from the University of Sunderland PPIE group and a trustee of the Northern HNC Charity were recruited as co-applicants. They attended project management group meetings and reviewed patient-facing documentation.

Qualitative interview study exploring the early identification and referral of patients with suspected head and neck cancer by community pharmacists in England.

OBJECTIVE: To explore pharmacists' perceptions of, and attitudes towards, the early identification and referral of patients with signs and symptoms indicating potential diagnosis of head and neck cancer (HNC) in community pharmacy settings. DESIGN: Qualitative methodology, using constant comparative analysis to undertake an iterative series of semistructured interviews. Framework analysis facilitated the identification of salient themes. SETTING: Community pharmacies in Northern England. PARTICIPANTS: 17 community pharmacists. RESULTS: Four salient and inter-related categories emerged: (1) Opportunity and access, indicating frequent consultations with patients presenting with potential HNC symptoms and the accessible nature of community pharmacists; (2) Knowledge gap, indicating knowledge of key referral criteria, but limited experience and expertise in undertaking more holistic patient assessments to inform clinical decision making; (3) Referral pathways and workloads; indicating good working relationships with general medical practices, but limited collaboration with dental services, and a desire to engage with formal referral pathways, but current practices based entirely on signposting resulting in a potential lack of safety-netting, no auditable trail, feedback mechanism or integration into the multidisciplinary team; (4) Utilisation of clinical decision support tools; indicating that no participants were aware the Head and Neck Cancer Risk Calculator (HaNC-RC V2) for HNC but were positive towards the use of such tools to improve decision making. HaNC-RC V2 was seen as a potential tool to facilitate a more holistic approach to assessing patient's symptoms, acting as a prompt to further explore a patient's presentation, requiring further investigation in this context. CONCLUSIONS: Community pharmacies offer access to patients and high-risk populations that could support HNC awareness initiatives, earlier identification and referral. However, further work to develop a sustainable and cost-effective approach to integrating pharmacists into cancer referral pathways is needed, alongside appropriate training for pharmacists to successfully deliver optimum patient care.

Oral health training for general practitioners and general practice teams.

The role of oral health in promoting general health and wellbeing is recognised, but there is minimal oral health training for doctors, including GPs. The Directorate of Multi-Disciplinary Dental Education (DMDE) at Health Education England North East and North Cumbria has introduced oral health training for GPs, incorporating training recommended by NICE oral health guidance. DMDE oral health training for GPs and general practice teams covered the diagnosis, prevention and management of oral disease, relevant prescribing and accessing dental care. Training has been shown to be worthwhile, positively impacting upon the clinical practice of GPs and thereby improving patient care. General health benefits are anticipated. Interactive training, as outlined in the DMDE lesson plan, was deemed effective. 1-hour courses conveniently delivered within general practices were most popular with GPs. Online courses have been less popular. Barriers to training were overcome through producing a promotional brochure and gaining the support of NHS medical leaders, who assisted with its distribution. A shift to training the trainer will improve the cost-effectiveness and sustainability of training. It is recommended that all GPs receive oral health training.