Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSwann, Ruthen
dc.contributor.authorMcPhail, Seanen
dc.contributor.authorWitt, Janaen
dc.contributor.authorShand, Brianen
dc.contributor.authorAbel, Garyen
dc.contributor.authorHiom, Saraen
dc.contributor.authorLyratzopoulos, Georgiosen
dc.contributor.authorRashbass, Jeremyen
dc.contributor.authorRubin, Gregen
dc.date.accessioned2018-02-16T17:53:58Z
dc.date.available2018-02-16T17:53:58Z
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/273317
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Continual improvements in diagnostic processes are needed to minimise the proportion of cancer patients who experience diagnostic delays. Clinical audit is a means to achieving this. AIM: To characterise key aspects of the diagnostic process for cancer and to generate baseline measures for future re-audit. DESIGN AND SETTING: Clinical audit of cancer diagnosis in general practices in 33 England. METHOD: Information on patient and tumour characteristics held in the English National Cancer Registry was supplemented by information from general practitioners in participating practices. Data items included diagnostic timepoints, patient characteristics and clinical management. RESULTS: Data were collected on 17 042 patients with new diagnosis of cancer during 2014 from 439 practices. Participating practices were similar to non-participating ones, particularly regarding population age, urban/rural location and practice-based patient experience measures. The median diagnostic interval for all patients was 40 days (IQR 15-86 days). Most patients were referred promptly (median primary care interval 5 days (IQR 0-27 days)). Where GPs deemed diagnostic delays to have occurred (22% of cases), patient, clinician or system factors were responsible in 26%, 28% and 34% of instances, respectively. Safety netting was recorded for 44% of patients. At least one primary care-led investigation was carried out for 45% of patients. Most patients (76%) had at least one prior co-morbid condition; 21% had 3 48 or more. CONCLUSION: The findings identify avenues for quality improvement activity and provide a baseline for future audit of the impact of 2015 NICE guidance on management and referral of suspected cancer.
dc.publisherRoyal College of General Practitioners
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/*
dc.titleThe diagnosis of cancer in general practice: results of the National Cancer Diagnosis Auditen
dc.typeArticle
prism.publicationNameBritish Journal of General Practiceen
dc.identifier.doi10.17863/CAM.20342
dcterms.dateAccepted2017-10-02en
rioxxterms.versionVoR*
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/en
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2017-10-02en
dc.contributor.orcidLyratzopoulos, Georgios [0000-0002-2873-7421]
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen
cam.issuedOnline2017-12-21en
rioxxterms.freetoread.startdate2100-01-01


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International