Variation in suspected cancer referral pathways in primary care: Comparative analysis across the International Benchmarking Cancer Partnership
Loading...
Citations
Altmetric:
Altmetric::
Download
Associated Records
Authors
File Licence
Editors
Date
2023-02-01
Source Title
British Journal of General Practice
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
ROYAL COLL GENERAL PRACTITIONERS
Melbourne Authors
Affiliation
General Practice
Document Type
Journal Article
Subject Code
Citation
Lynch, C., Harrison, S., Emery, J. D., Clelland, C., Dorman, L., Collins, C., Johansen, M. L., Lawrenson, R., Surgey, A., Weller, D., Jarbøl, D. E., Balasubramaniam, K. & Nicholson, B. D. (2023). Variation in suspected cancer referral pathways in primary care: Comparative analysis across the International Benchmarking Cancer Partnership. British Journal of General Practice, 73 (727), pp.E88-E94. https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2022.0110.
Access Status
Open Access
Access URL
Open Access URL
Open Access at PMC
Linked Resource URL
NHMRC Grant Code
ARC Grant Code
Description
Abstract
BACKGROUND: International variations in cancer outcomes persist and may be influenced by differences in the accessibility and organisation of cancer patient pathways. More evidence is needed to understand to what extent variations in the structure of primary care referral pathways for cancer investigation contribute to differences in the timeliness of diagnoses and cancer outcomes in different countries. AIM: To explore the variation in primary care referral pathways for the management of suspected cancer across different countries. DESIGN AND SETTING: Descriptive comparative analysis using mixed methods across the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership (ICBP) countries. METHOD: Schematics of primary care referral pathways were developed across 10 ICBP jurisdictions. The schematics were initially developed using the Aarhus statement (a resource providing greater insight and precision into early cancer diagnosis research) and were further supplemented with expert insights through consulting leading experts in primary care and cancer, existing ICBP data, a focused review of existing evidence on the management of suspected cancer, published primary care cancer guidelines, and evaluations of referral tools and initiatives in primary care. RESULTS: Referral pathway schematics for 10 ICBP jurisdictions were presented alongside a descriptive comparison of the organisation of primary care management of suspected cancer. Several key areas of variation across countries were identified: inflexibility of referral pathways, lack of a managed route for non-specific symptoms, primary care practitioner decision-making autonomy, direct access to investigations, and use of emergency routes. CONCLUSION: Analysing the differences in referral processes can prompt further research to better understand the impact of variation on the timeliness of diagnoses and cancer outcomes. Studying these schematics in local contexts may help to identify opportunities to improve care and facilitate discussions on what may constitute best referral practice.