The potential and pitfalls for developing guidelines in oncology.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Evidence-Based Medicine↗
Biomedical subjects
J Austoker
Publications and source records attributed to J Austoker.
A study of GP referrals to a family cancer clinic for breast/ovarian cancer.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the appropriateness of primary care referrals to the Oxford Regional Genetics Service on account of a family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer and to explore GPs' expectations following a referral. METHODS: Fifty consecutive GP referrers were sent a questionnaire post-referral, and their referral letters were reviewed. RESULTS: The study achieved a high response rate (94%) and showed that many GPs did not know which patients warrant referral to the genetics service and that they had unrealistic expectations of what happens at the clinic. CONCLUSIONS: If GPs are to fulfil their gatekeeper role effectively, and possibly become more involved in the delivery of genetic services in the future, it is clear that they require further education in this area.
Breast Neoplasms↗
New developments in genetics-knowledge, attitudes and information needs of practice nurses.
BACKGROUND: In response to increased referrals to geneticists and the predicted patient demand for genetic counselling, it has been proposed that some genetics services should be provided in primary care. Practice nurses are ideally placed to collect family history information and advise patients accordingly in new patient, family planning, well women/men and chronic disease clinics, but little is known about their knowledge, skills and attitudes towards providing genetic advice. OBJECTIVES: The survey aimed to measure the current situation with regard to: the prevalence of family history recording by practice nurses; confidence in collecting and acting upon family history; and practice nurses' knowledge about familial disorders and genetics. It also investigated what practice nurses think their role should be in relation to the delivery of genetic services; their educational needs; and the most appropriate ways of delivering training/support. METHODS: A postal questionnaire survey was carried out of all practices nurses (n = 909) in four Health Authorities in England (Oxfordshire, Northamptonshire, Nottingham and North Nottinghamshire) and one Health Board in Scotland (Lothian). Analyses were primarily descriptive. RESULTS: A total of 600 nurses (response rate = 66.0%) returned a completed questionnaire. Ninety-six per cent of practice nurses reported that they routinely collect family history information. Over half of the respondents had been consulted in the previous 3 months by patients with a worry about family history of cancer. Approximately 60% of nurses felt confident about collecting the relevant details regarding a family history of breast cancer but felt less confident in collecting the information regarding familial colorectal cancer. Nurses were also unsure how to proceed, with over a third of nurses referring patients to the GP even if they thought the patient was at population risk or, conversely, not referring those that they thought were at considerably higher risk to the GP. There was a reported need for education about familial disease in general and overall agreement that nurses could play a role in genetics in primary care. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence of considerable activity from practice nurses regarding routine collection of family history. There is a need for further education for practice nurses regarding family history information and the new genetics so that this information is managed appropriately.
Clinical Competence↗
Cluster randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two primary care interventions aimed at improving attendance for breast screening.
OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two interventions based in primary care aimed at increasing uptake of breast screening. SETTING: 24 General practices with low uptake in the second round of screening (below 60%) in north west London and the West Midlands, UK. Participants were all women registered with these practices and eligible for screening in the third round. METHODS: Pragmatic factorial cluster randomised controlled trial, with practices randomised to a systematic intervention (general practitioner letter), an opportunistic intervention (flag in women's notes prompting discussion by health professionals), neither intervention, or both. Outcome measures were attendance for screening 6 months after the practices had been screened and cost-effectiveness of the interventions. RESULTS: 6,133 Women were included: 1,721 control; 1,818 letter; 1,232 flag; 1,362 both interventions. Attendance data were obtained for 5,732 (93%) women. The two interventions independently increased breast screening uptake in a logistic regression model adjusted for clustering, with the flag (odds ratio (OR) 1.43, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.14 to 1.79; p=0.0019) marginally more effective than the letter (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.64; p=0.015). Health service costs per additional attendance were 26 pounds (letter) and 41 pounds (flag). CONCLUSIONS: Although both interventions increased attendance for breast screening, the letter was the more cost-effective. Any decision to implement both interventions rather than just the letter will depend on whether the additional (41 pounds) costs are judged worthwhile in terms of the gains in breast screening uptake.
Breast Neoplasms↗
Improving attendance for breast screening among recent non-attenders: a randomised controlled trial of two interventions in primary care.
OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two primary care based interventions aimed at increasing breast screening uptake for women who had recently failed to attend. SETTING: 13 General practices with low uptake in the second round of breast screening (below 60%) in north west London and the West Midlands, United Kingdom. Participants were women in these practices who were recent non-attenders for breast screening in the third round. METHODS: Pragmatic factorial randomised controlled trial, with people randomised to a systematic intervention (general practitioner letter), an opportunistic intervention (flag in women's notes prompting discussion by health professionals), neither intervention, or both. Outcome measures were attendance for screening 6 months after randomisation and cost-effectiveness of the interventions. RESULTS: 1,158 Women were individually randomised as follows: 289 control; 291 letter; 290 flag; 288 both interventions. Attendance was ascertained for 1,148 (99%) of the 1,158 women. Logistic regression adjusting for the other intervention and practice produced an odds ratio (OR) for attendance of 1.51 (95% confidence interval (95% CI 1.02 to 2.26; p=0.04) for the letter, and 1.39 (95% CI 0.93 to 2.07; p=0.10) for the flag. Health service costs/ additional attendance were 35 pounds (letter) and 65 pounds (flag). CONCLUSIONS: Among recent non-attenders, the letter was effective in increasing breast screening attendance. The flag was of equivocal effectiveness and was considerably less cost-effective than the letter.
Adult↗
Evaluation of the impact of two educational interventions on GP management of familial breast/ovarian cancer cases: a cluster randomised controlled trial.
BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that primary care should become more involved in providing genetic services, such as basic risk assessment, to enable patients with a moderate/high risk to be referred and those with a low risk to receive reassurance and advice from their general practitioner (GP). However, GPs currently lack knowledge and confidence in this area. AIM: To investigate the effect of an in-practice educational session and information pack on GP management of familial breast/ovarian cancer cases. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: GP principals in 170 practices in Oxfordshire and Northamptonshire. Of the 688 GPs, 426 (62%) participated. METHOD: Practices were randomised either to Group A (receiving an inpractice educational session plus information pack), Group B (receiving an information pack alone), or Group C (receiving neither an educational session nor a pack). The main study outcome was the proportion of GPs making the correct referral decision on at least five out of six family history vignettes. A secondary outcome was GPs' reported confidence in managing patients with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer, measured by a score that was generated by combining responses to four questions. RESULTS: There was a 40% (95% CI = 30-50%, P < 0.001) improvement in the proportion of GPs who made the correct referral decision on at least five out of the six vignettes in Group A (111/140 [79%]) compared with Group C (controls) (63/162 [39%]), and a 42% (95% CI = 31-52%, P < 0.001) improvement in Group B (100/124 [81%]) compared with the control group. There was a trend in reported confidence in the management of individuals with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer from a mean confidence score of 2.3 in Group A to 2.0 in Group B and 1.5 in Group C (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Providing GPs with an information pack significantly improved referral decisions regarding patients with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer. Although extremely well received, an in-house educational session produced no additional improvements. There were, however, greater levels of reported confidence in the group who received the educational session in addition to the information pack.
Breast Neoplasms↗
Computer support for interpreting family histories of breast and ovarian cancer in primary care: comparative study with simulated cases.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the potential effect of computer support on general practitioners' management of familial breast and ovarian cancer, and to compare the effectiveness of two different types of computer program. DESIGN: Crossover experiment with balanced block design. PARTICIPANTS: Of a random sample of 100 general practitioners from Buckinghamshire who were invited, 41 agreed to participate. From these, 36 were selected for a fully balanced study. INTERVENTIONS: Doctors managed 18 simulated cases: 6 with computerised decision support system Risk Assessment in Genetics (RAGs), 6 with Cyrillic (an established pedigree drawing program designed for clinical geneticists), and 6 with pen and paper. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of appropriate management decisions made (maximum 6), mean time taken to reach a decision, number of pedigrees accurately drawn (maximum 6). Secondary measures were method of support preferred for particular aspects of managing family histories of cancer; importance of specific information on cancer genetics that might be provided by an "ideal computer program." RESULTS: RAGs resulted in significantly more appropriate management decisions (median 6) than either Cyrillic (median 3) or pen and paper (median 3); median difference between RAGs and Cyrillic 2.5 (95% confidence interval 2.0 to 3.0; P<0.0001). RAGs also resulted in significantly more accurate pedigrees (median 5) than both Cyrillic (median 3.5) and pen and paper (median 2); median difference between RAGs and Cyrillic 1.5 (1.0 to 2.0; P<0.0001). The time taken to use RAGs (median 178 seconds) was 51 seconds longer per case (95% confidence interval 36 to 65; P<0.0001) than pen and paper (median 124 seconds) but was less than Cyrillic (median 203 seconds; difference 23. (5 to 43; P=0.02)). 33 doctors (92% (78% to 98%)) preferred using RAGs overall. The most important elements of an "ideal computer program" for genetic advice in primary care were referral advice, the capacity to create pedigrees, and provision of evidence and explanations to support advice. CONCLUSIONS: RAGs could enable general practitioners to be more effective gatekeepers to genetics services, empowering them to reassure the majority of patients with a family history of breast and ovarian cancer who are not at increased genetic risk.
Breast Neoplasms↗
Gaining informed consent for screening. Is difficult--but many misconceptions need to be undone.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Choice Behavior↗
The 'new genetics' and primary care: GPs' views on their role and their educational needs.
BACKGROUND: Given the limited specialist resources available to cope with the rising demand for genetic services, it has been proposed that at least some of these services are provided by primary care in the future. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to explore GPs' attitudes towards new developments in genetics, to establish the role they envisage for primary care and to clearly define the education, information and training needed to support them in this role. METHODS: We carried out a qualitative study with GPs using four focus groups (26 GPs) and 15 individual semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: GPs perceive genetics as an important and increasingly relevant topic for primary care. Views on the appropriate level of involvement for primary care are mixed. GPs currently lack the relevant knowledge and skills to manage patients concerned about their family history. Other potential barriers to increasing primary care involvement included the time and costs involved, and ethical and legal concerns. CONCLUSION: If primary care is to become more involved in the delivery of genetic services in the future, then a major educational effort is required to raise awareness of the potential scope and limitations of new developments.
Attitude of Health Personnel↗
Quality assurance in screening programmes.
All screening programmes do harm; some also do good. The responsibility of the policy-maker is to decide which programmes do more good than harm at reasonable cost and then introduce them, once they are confident that the screening programme could and will reach the standard of quality required for success. The ratio of benefit to harm is not, however, constant and this relationship demonstrates a shifting balance.
Humans↗
Do women who undergo further investigation for breast screening suffer adverse psychological consequences? A multi-centre follow-up study comparing different breast screening result groups five months after their last breast screening appointment.
BACKGROUND: In 1995-1996 about 53500 women aged 50-64 attending for routine breast screening were called back for further investigation after an initial mammogram. Even when women were found to be clear after further investigation, significant adverse psychological consequences (PCs) can remain one month later. This follow-up study investigates whether residual emotional effects persisted five months after women received a clear result. METHODS: Women who had previously completed a questionnaire one month after their last breast screening appointment, at which they had a clear result, were invited to complete a further postal questionnaire four months later (five months after their last appointment). We compare women who received a clear result after assessment without fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC), after assessment with FNAC, after a benign biopsy, and those who had been placed on early recall, with those who received a clear result after mammography (reference group). RESULTS: The response rate was 76 per cent (215/284). All groups of women who went on for further investigation suffered significantly greater adverse psychological consequences (PCs) at five months than women who were given a clear result after mammography. Compared with 10 per cent (5/52) of women who received a clear result after a basic mammogram, adverse psychological consequences were experienced by 59 per cent (27/46, p<0.00001) of the women who were placed on six month early recall, 61 per cent (14/23, p<0.0001) of women who had benign surgical biopsy, 44 per cent (18/41, p<0.0001) of women who received a clear result after assessment (with FNAC), and 45 per cent (23/51, p<0.0001) of women who received a clear result after assessment (without FNAC). Whereas all groups who had gone on for further investigations had experienced a significant decrease in PCs between one month and five months, those who were placed on six month early recall showed no significant difference in PCs between these two time periods. Other factors relating to adverse experiences as a result of breast screening are reported. CONCLUSION: Despite receiving a clear final result, women who undergo further investigation suffer significantly greater adverse psychological consequences five months after their last screening appointment than women who receive a clear result after mammography.
Adaptation, Psychological↗
Effect on attendance at breast cancer screening of adding a self administered questionnaire to the usual invitation to breast screening in southern England.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of the research described in this paper was to ascertain whether inclusion of a self administered questionnaire with the usual invitation to routine breast screening affected screening uptake. Secondary aims included establishing appropriate questionnaire distribution and collection methods within the framework of the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme and optimisation of questionnaire design. DESIGN: Randomised study. SETTING: Oxfordshire and West of London Breast Screening Units. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS: 6400 women invited for routine screening mammography were individually randomised to receive either the usual breast screening invitation alone, or to receive the usual invitation accompanied by a self administered questionnaire, to be returned at the time of screening. Participants were then followed up and attendance rates at screening were compared between groups. MAIN RESULTS: Screening attendance rates were similar in women who did and did not receive a questionnaire (71% in each group). Of those who were sent a questionnaire and attended for screening, 77% returned a completed questionnaire. Screening uptake was not affected by the way in which the questionnaire was returned or by whether or not personal details and signed permission for follow up were requested. CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of a self administered questionnaire accompanying the invitation to breast screening did not adversely affect screening uptake. A high proportion of women completed the questionnaire.
Breast Neoplasms↗
Early rescreen/recall in the UK National Health Service breast screening programme: epidemiological data.
OBJECTIVE: In the United Kingdom in 1994-95 about 16,500 women aged 50 to 64 were asked to come back earlier than the usual three yearly screening interval for further mammography (early rescreen (ES)) or for a range of further investigations at an assessment centre (early recall (ER)). This study aimed at providing epidemiological data on ES/ER, in particular, how often and why it is used, and what the outcome is of using it. SETTING: National Health Service breast screening programme in the United Kingdom. METHODS: All breast screening units were invited to complete a postal questionnaire. Two reminders were sent. The units were asked retrospectively to provide breast screening data about women aged 50 to 64 from their local computer systems. Women placed on ES/ER were followed up for at least one year. RESULTS: The response rate was 71% (69/97), of which 14% (10/69) were unable to provide the required data, leaving 59 completed questionnaires (61%). The rate of placing women on ES/ER was above 1.0% for 26/54 (48%) responding breast screening units and above 2.0% for 13/54 (24%) units. Women were placed on ES/ER because of (a) previous breast cancer (21% of cases; cancer detection rate 2.4%), (b) diagnostic uncertainty (51%; cancer detection rate 3.0%), or (c) family history (27%; cancer detection rate 0.6%). Breast screening units with a high rate of placing women on ER were significantly more likely to have a high recall rate (rs = 0.63; n = 53; p < 0.0005) or a high benign surgical biopsy rate (rs = 0.33; n = 49; p < 0.05), or both. The cancer detection rate of ES/ER tended to decrease with increasing ES/ER rates (rs = -0.37; n = 51; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A relatively large number of women were placed on ES or ER for a range of reasons. If the recommendations given are followed, the number of women placed on ER may be reduced while maintaining the cancer detection rate at the required level. The option of ES should not be used.
Breast Neoplasms↗
Recalling women for further investigation of breast screening: women's experiences at the clinic and afterwards.
BACKGROUND: In 1993-1994 about 66 000 women in breast screening were called back (recalled) to a specialized centre for further investigation (assessment). The information requirements of these women during and after their appointment were investigated. Ninety per cent of recalled women were found not to have cancer. METHODS: Consecutive women (n = 2132) from eight breast screening centres throughout the United Kingdom were asked to complete a postal questionnaire two weeks after attendance at assessment. No reminder was sent. RESULTS: The response rate was 70 per cent. Communication was viewed by women as the most stress-relieving aspect of the recall appointment. Women from centres where nurses provided the opportunity to talk in private before further investigation were less likely to want to talk later about why assessment was needed for them (4 per cent) than women from centres not using a nurse for this purpose (30 per cent) (p < 0.0001). The former were also less likely to want more information about the tests they had had (2 per cent physical examination, 2 per cent X-rays, 3 per cent ultrasound) than the latter (6 per cent, 9 per cent and 10 per cent, respectively) (p < 0.005). Distressed/very distressed women were more likely to have wanted to talk to someone at the centre about the reason for recall (26 per cent) than somewhat distressed/ not distressed women (18 per cent) (p < 0.0001). However, the former were no more likely to have spoken to staff about it than the latter (33 per cent vs 32 per cent). Ways to improve the giving of results were identified. After the appointment women commented that there was a need for more information about harmless breast conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Overall the quality of communication at assessment was viewed highly by women, but varied considerably between centres. There is scope for substantial further improvement. Breast care nurses can play an important role in this.
Attitude to Health↗
Breast screening: adverse psychological consequences one month after placing women on early recall because of a diagnostic uncertainty. A multicentre study.
BACKGROUND: It was the original intention of the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) to place women who were not diagnosed with cancer on three yearly routine recall (RR). In 1994-5 approximately 16,500 women, aged 50 to 64, were placed on early recall (ER) at a shorter time interval, of which about 98% will have a normal result. This large number exceeds the expectations of the NHSBSP. OBJECTIVE: To establish the adverse psychological consequences (PCs) for women one month after placement on ER because of a diagnostic uncertainty, and if detected, to suggest practical solutions to reduce them. METHODS: Thirteen breast screening centres throughout the UK participated in the study. From March to October 1995 all women who were placed on ER because of a diagnostic uncertainty were identified and compared with groups of women placed on RR (after mammography, assessment, fine needle aspiration, and a benign biopsy). These women were invited to complete a postal questionnaire one month after they were placed on ER or RR. One reminder was sent. RESULTS: Overall 75% of women completed the questionnaire. The adverse PCs of placing women on ER because of a diagnostic uncertainty were higher (63%; n = 81 of 130) than those of women placed on RR after mammography (29%; n = 38 of 130) (P < 0.00001) or assessment (50%; n = 64 of 128) (P < 0.05), but lower than the adverse PCs of women who underwent a benign biopsy (87%; n = 26 of 30) (P < 0.05). Factors that were significantly associated with subsequent adverse PCs were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The adverse PCs of being placed on ER because of a diagnostic uncertainty were significantly higher than those of women who turned out to have a false-positive mammographic result after assessment. Possible practical solutions are discussed.
Breast Neoplasms↗
Revision of "NHS breast screening: the facts": an evaluation.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Breast Neoplasms↗
Cancer prevention in primary care. Current trends and some prospects for the future--1.
Cancer control encompasses the whole spectrum from prevention and early diagnosis to treatment and palliation. The key to the future of cancer control will be to establish multidisciplinary approaches to each type of cancer across this spectrum. For primary prevention this requires some understanding of the causes of each cancer. Although understanding of the aetiology of cancer has greatly improved, prospects for the primary prevention of many common cancers remain remote. Other approaches currently under evaluation include chemoprevention and the use of biomarkers. The identification of predisposing genes for some of the common cancers may have a considerable impact on the ability to recognise those at risk. Overall, however, mortality trends indicate that reduction of smoking remains the main priority for cancer prevention in the United Kingdom. For primary care teams, brief interventions to reduce smoking are likely to achieve the greatest benefit. This should be seen as part of broader policies aimed at achieving change in the whole population. The government must acknowledge its major responsibility to cancer prevention by banning all forms of advertising and promotion of tobacco.
Family Practice↗
Screening for colorectal cancer.
In the United Kingdom there are almost 31,000 new cases of colorectal cancer each year and nearly 20,000 deaths. It is the second most common cause of all deaths from cancer in the United Kingdom. The efficacy of screening with faecal occult blood tests to detect and treat tumours at an early stage, and thereby to reduce mortality, is currently being assessed in several randomised controlled trials. In general, faecal occult blood tests have a low sensitivity and only moderate levels of uptake among the population invited for screening. Until the studies in Denmark, Sweden, and Nottingham report their findings, there is no case for providing such screening routinely to an asymptomatic population. Detecting and removing premalignant adenomas by flexible sigmoidoscopy could be more effective than detecting early localised, asymptomatic cancers in reducing deaths from colorectal cancer. It is estimated that screening people at about the age of 60 by a single flexible sigmoidoscopy examination with appropriate colonoscopic surveillance could prevent 5500 cases of colorectal cancer and 3500 deaths in the United Kingdom each year. A randomised controlled trial to confirm these observations should be seen as a priority.
Adult↗