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

被引:18
作者
Nicholson, Brian D. [1 ]
Goyder, Clare R. [1 ]
Bankhead, Clare R. [1 ]
Toftegaard, Berit S. [4 ]
Rose, Peter W. [2 ]
Thulesius, Hans [6 ]
Vedsted, Peter [5 ]
Perera, Rafael [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oxford, Nuffield Dept Primary Care Hlth Sci, Oxford, England
[2] Univ Oxford, Nuffield Dept Primary Care Hlth Sci, Primary Care, Oxford, England
[3] Univ Oxford, Nuffield Dept Primary Care Hlth Sci, Med Stat, Oxford, England
[4] Aarhus Univ, Res Unit Gen Practice, Aarhus, Denmark
[5] Aarhus Univ, Res Unit Gen Practice, Primary Care, Aarhus, Denmark
[6] Lund Univ, Dept Clin Sci, Family Med, Vaxjo, Sweden
关键词
cancer; diagnosis; diagnostic errors; diagnostic safety; general practice; primary care; safety netting; TEST RESULT COMMUNICATION; CLOSED MALPRACTICE CLAIMS; TEST RESULT MANAGEMENT; GENERAL-PRACTICE; DELAYED DIAGNOSES; GOOD-NEWS; NO NEWS; HEALTH; ERRORS; PERSPECTIVES;
D O I
10.3399/bjgp18X695813
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页码:E323 / E332
页数:10
相关论文
共 46 条
  • [1] Diagnostic safety-netting
    Almond, Susanna
    Mant, David
    Thompson, Matthew
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF GENERAL PRACTICE, 2009, 59 (568) : 872 - 874
  • [2] Diagnosis in General Practice Test of time
    Almond, Susanna C.
    Summerton, Nick
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2009, 338 : 43 - 45
  • [3] Juggling efficiency. An ethnographic study exploring healthcare seeking practices and institutional logics in Danish primary care settings
    Andersen, Rikke Sand
    Vedsted, Peter
    [J]. SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2015, 128 : 239 - 245
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2015, Improving diagnosis in health care, DOI DOI 10.17226/21794
  • [5] How might healthcare systems influence speed of cancer diagnosis: A narrative review
    Brown, Sally
    Castelli, Michele
    Hunter, David J.
    Erskine, Jonathan
    Vedsted, Peter
    Foot, Catherine
    Rubin, Greg
    [J]. SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2014, 116 : 56 - 63
  • [6] Dealing with low-incidence serious diseases in general practice
    Buntinx, Frank
    Mant, David
    Van den Bruel, Ann
    Donner-Banzhof, Norbert
    Dinant, Geert-Jan
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF GENERAL PRACTICE, 2011, 61 (582) : 43 - 46
  • [7] The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership: An international collaboration to inform cancer policy in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom
    Butler, John
    Foot, Catherine
    Bomb, Martine
    Hiom, Sara
    Coleman, Michel
    Bryant, Heather
    Vedsted, Peter
    Hanson, Jane
    Richards, Mike
    [J]. HEALTH POLICY, 2013, 112 (1-2) : 148 - 155
  • [8] Failure to Follow-Up Test Results for Ambulatory Patients: A Systematic Review
    Callen, Joanne L.
    Westbrook, Johanna I.
    Georgiou, Andrew
    Li, Julie
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2012, 27 (10) : 1334 - 1348
  • [9] Worrying about wasting GP time as a barrier to help-seeking: a community-based, qualitative study
    Cromme, Susanne K.
    Whitaker, Katriina L.
    Winstanley, Kelly
    Renzi, Cristina
    Smith, Claire Friedemann
    Wardle, Jane
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF GENERAL PRACTICE, 2016, 66 (648) : E474 - E482
  • [10] "It can't be very important because it comes and goes"-patients' accounts of intermittent symptoms preceding a pancreatic cancer diagnosis: a qualitative study
    Evans, Julie
    Chapple, Alison
    Salisbury, Helen
    Corrie, Pippa
    Ziebland, Sue
    [J]. BMJ OPEN, 2014, 4 (02):