Aarhus University Seal / Aarhus Universitets segl

Peter Vedsted

Responsibility for follow-up during the diagnostic process in primary care: a secondary analysis of International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership data

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Standard

Responsibility for follow-up during the diagnostic process in primary care : a secondary analysis of International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership data. / Nicholson, Brian D; Goyder, Clare R; Bankhead, Clare R; Toftegaard, Berit S; Rose, Peter W; Thulesius, Hans; Vedsted, Peter; Perera, Rafael.

I: British Journal of General Practice, Bind 68, Nr. 670, 05.2018, s. e323-e332.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

Nicholson, BD, Goyder, CR, Bankhead, CR, Toftegaard, BS, Rose, PW, Thulesius, H, Vedsted, P & Perera, R 2018, 'Responsibility for follow-up during the diagnostic process in primary care: a secondary analysis of International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership data', British Journal of General Practice, bind 68, nr. 670, s. e323-e332. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp18X695813

APA

Nicholson, B. D., Goyder, C. R., Bankhead, C. R., Toftegaard, B. S., Rose, P. W., Thulesius, H., ... Perera, R. (2018). Responsibility for follow-up during the diagnostic process in primary care: a secondary analysis of International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership data. British Journal of General Practice, 68(670), e323-e332. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp18X695813

CBE

Nicholson BD, Goyder CR, Bankhead CR, Toftegaard BS, Rose PW, Thulesius H, Vedsted P, Perera R. 2018. Responsibility for follow-up during the diagnostic process in primary care: a secondary analysis of International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership data. British Journal of General Practice. 68(670):e323-e332. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp18X695813

MLA

Vancouver

Nicholson BD, Goyder CR, Bankhead CR, Toftegaard BS, Rose PW, Thulesius H o.a. Responsibility for follow-up during the diagnostic process in primary care: a secondary analysis of International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership data. British Journal of General Practice. 2018 maj;68(670):e323-e332. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp18X695813

Author

Nicholson, Brian D ; Goyder, Clare R ; Bankhead, Clare R ; Toftegaard, Berit S ; Rose, Peter W ; Thulesius, Hans ; Vedsted, Peter ; Perera, Rafael. / Responsibility for follow-up during the diagnostic process in primary care : a secondary analysis of International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership data. I: British Journal of General Practice. 2018 ; Bind 68, Nr. 670. s. e323-e332.

Bibtex

@article{271c05bba7ec43988fc1f2f7aee5ab2a,
title = "Responsibility for follow-up during the diagnostic process in primary care: a secondary analysis of International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership data",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: It is unclear to what extent primary care practitioners (PCPs) should retain responsibility for follow-up to ensure that patients are monitored until their symptoms or signs are explained.AIM: To explore the extent to which PCPs retain responsibility for diagnostic follow-up actions across 11 international jurisdictions.DESIGN AND SETTING: A secondary analysis of survey data from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership.METHOD: The authors counted the proportion of 2879 PCPs who retained responsibility for each area of follow-up (appointments, test results, and non-attenders). Proportions were weighted by the sample size of each jurisdiction. Pooled estimates were obtained using a random-effects model, and UK estimates were compared with non-UK ones. Free-text responses were analysed to contextualise quantitative findings using a modified grounded theory approach.RESULTS: PCPs varied in their retention of responsibility for follow-up from 19{\%} to 97{\%} across jurisdictions and area of follow-up. Test reconciliation was inadequate in most jurisdictions. Significantly fewer UK PCPs retained responsibility for test result communication (73{\%} versus 85{\%}, P = 0.04) and non-attender follow-up (78{\%} versus 93{\%}, P<0.01) compared with non-UK PCPs. PCPs have developed bespoke, inconsistent solutions to follow-up. In cases of greatest concern, 'double safety netting' is described, where both patient and PCP retain responsibility.CONCLUSION: The degree to which PCPs retain responsibility for follow-up is dependent on their level of concern about the patient and their primary care system's properties. Integrated systems to support follow-up are at present underutilised, and research into their development, uptake, and effectiveness seems warranted.",
author = "Nicholson, {Brian D} and Goyder, {Clare R} and Bankhead, {Clare R} and Toftegaard, {Berit S} and Rose, {Peter W} and Hans Thulesius and Peter Vedsted and Rafael Perera",
note = "{\circledC} British Journal of General Practice 2018.",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
doi = "10.3399/bjgp18X695813",
language = "English",
volume = "68",
pages = "e323--e332",
journal = "British Journal of General Practice",
issn = "0960-1643",
publisher = "Royal College of General Practitioners",
number = "670",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Responsibility for follow-up during the diagnostic process in primary care

T2 - a secondary analysis of International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership data

AU - Nicholson, Brian D

AU - Goyder, Clare R

AU - Bankhead, Clare R

AU - Toftegaard, Berit S

AU - Rose, Peter W

AU - Thulesius, Hans

AU - Vedsted, Peter

AU - Perera, Rafael

N1 - © British Journal of General Practice 2018.

PY - 2018/5

Y1 - 2018/5

N2 - BACKGROUND: It is unclear to what extent primary care practitioners (PCPs) should retain responsibility for follow-up to ensure that patients are monitored until their symptoms or signs are explained.AIM: To explore the extent to which PCPs retain responsibility for diagnostic follow-up actions across 11 international jurisdictions.DESIGN AND SETTING: A secondary analysis of survey data from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership.METHOD: The authors counted the proportion of 2879 PCPs who retained responsibility for each area of follow-up (appointments, test results, and non-attenders). Proportions were weighted by the sample size of each jurisdiction. Pooled estimates were obtained using a random-effects model, and UK estimates were compared with non-UK ones. Free-text responses were analysed to contextualise quantitative findings using a modified grounded theory approach.RESULTS: PCPs varied in their retention of responsibility for follow-up from 19% to 97% across jurisdictions and area of follow-up. Test reconciliation was inadequate in most jurisdictions. Significantly fewer UK PCPs retained responsibility for test result communication (73% versus 85%, P = 0.04) and non-attender follow-up (78% versus 93%, P<0.01) compared with non-UK PCPs. PCPs have developed bespoke, inconsistent solutions to follow-up. In cases of greatest concern, 'double safety netting' is described, where both patient and PCP retain responsibility.CONCLUSION: The degree to which PCPs retain responsibility for follow-up is dependent on their level of concern about the patient and their primary care system's properties. Integrated systems to support follow-up are at present underutilised, and research into their development, uptake, and effectiveness seems warranted.

AB - BACKGROUND: It is unclear to what extent primary care practitioners (PCPs) should retain responsibility for follow-up to ensure that patients are monitored until their symptoms or signs are explained.AIM: To explore the extent to which PCPs retain responsibility for diagnostic follow-up actions across 11 international jurisdictions.DESIGN AND SETTING: A secondary analysis of survey data from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership.METHOD: The authors counted the proportion of 2879 PCPs who retained responsibility for each area of follow-up (appointments, test results, and non-attenders). Proportions were weighted by the sample size of each jurisdiction. Pooled estimates were obtained using a random-effects model, and UK estimates were compared with non-UK ones. Free-text responses were analysed to contextualise quantitative findings using a modified grounded theory approach.RESULTS: PCPs varied in their retention of responsibility for follow-up from 19% to 97% across jurisdictions and area of follow-up. Test reconciliation was inadequate in most jurisdictions. Significantly fewer UK PCPs retained responsibility for test result communication (73% versus 85%, P = 0.04) and non-attender follow-up (78% versus 93%, P<0.01) compared with non-UK PCPs. PCPs have developed bespoke, inconsistent solutions to follow-up. In cases of greatest concern, 'double safety netting' is described, where both patient and PCP retain responsibility.CONCLUSION: The degree to which PCPs retain responsibility for follow-up is dependent on their level of concern about the patient and their primary care system's properties. Integrated systems to support follow-up are at present underutilised, and research into their development, uptake, and effectiveness seems warranted.

U2 - 10.3399/bjgp18X695813

DO - 10.3399/bjgp18X695813

M3 - Journal article

VL - 68

SP - e323-e332

JO - British Journal of General Practice

JF - British Journal of General Practice

SN - 0960-1643

IS - 670

ER -