Cargando…

Does an increase in visits to general practice indicate a malignancy?

BACKGROUND: An increase in a patient’s visits to doctors usually raises concerns and may be a ‘red flag’ for a patient’s deterioration of health. The aim of this study was to analyze whether an increase of patient-physician contacts is a first sign of a malignancy in a patient’s near future. METHODS...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hauswaldt, Johannes, Hummers-Pradier, Eva, Himmel, Wolfgang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4960682/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27456975
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-016-0477-0
_version_ 1782444567309582336
author Hauswaldt, Johannes
Hummers-Pradier, Eva
Himmel, Wolfgang
author_facet Hauswaldt, Johannes
Hummers-Pradier, Eva
Himmel, Wolfgang
author_sort Hauswaldt, Johannes
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: An increase in a patient’s visits to doctors usually raises concerns and may be a ‘red flag’ for a patient’s deterioration of health. The aim of this study was to analyze whether an increase of patient-physician contacts is a first sign of a malignancy in a patient’s near future. METHODS: This is a retrospective case-control study. From 153 German general practices’ electronic patient records (EPR), cases with at least one new malignancy diagnosis and no-malignancy controls were matched for gender and age. We calculated (1) the number of contacts in the first quarter up to the sixth quarter before a malignancy diagnosis was made and (2) the inter-contact interval (ICI), i.e. the time lag between two consecutive patient-physician contacts measured in days. Differences between cases and controls were investigated in several analyses of variance, with group and time as main factors. RESULTS: A total of 3,310 cases and 3,310 controls could be included. The number of contacts for cases in the six quarters before a malignancy diagnosis increased from 4.8 contacts (SD 4.3) to 5.5 contacts (SD 4.8). The number of contacts for controls increased only marginally from 4.3 contacts (SD 3.6) to 4.5 (SD 4.2). The factor ‘group’ (cases vs. controls) was highly significant in the analyses of variance, also ‘time’ and the interaction ‘group * time’. The effect size, however, was very small (R(2) being less than 0.02), which is the equivalent for about one additional contact per quarter in cases directly before a newly made malignancy diagnosis. CONCLUSION: An increase in contact frequency is a call for GPs to become more attentive towards these patients. It may raise the suspicion of an impending serious disease but the increase is not so dramatic and unique that it can be interpreted a reliable sign of a malignant diagnosis. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-016-0477-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4960682
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49606822016-07-27 Does an increase in visits to general practice indicate a malignancy? Hauswaldt, Johannes Hummers-Pradier, Eva Himmel, Wolfgang BMC Fam Pract Research Article BACKGROUND: An increase in a patient’s visits to doctors usually raises concerns and may be a ‘red flag’ for a patient’s deterioration of health. The aim of this study was to analyze whether an increase of patient-physician contacts is a first sign of a malignancy in a patient’s near future. METHODS: This is a retrospective case-control study. From 153 German general practices’ electronic patient records (EPR), cases with at least one new malignancy diagnosis and no-malignancy controls were matched for gender and age. We calculated (1) the number of contacts in the first quarter up to the sixth quarter before a malignancy diagnosis was made and (2) the inter-contact interval (ICI), i.e. the time lag between two consecutive patient-physician contacts measured in days. Differences between cases and controls were investigated in several analyses of variance, with group and time as main factors. RESULTS: A total of 3,310 cases and 3,310 controls could be included. The number of contacts for cases in the six quarters before a malignancy diagnosis increased from 4.8 contacts (SD 4.3) to 5.5 contacts (SD 4.8). The number of contacts for controls increased only marginally from 4.3 contacts (SD 3.6) to 4.5 (SD 4.2). The factor ‘group’ (cases vs. controls) was highly significant in the analyses of variance, also ‘time’ and the interaction ‘group * time’. The effect size, however, was very small (R(2) being less than 0.02), which is the equivalent for about one additional contact per quarter in cases directly before a newly made malignancy diagnosis. CONCLUSION: An increase in contact frequency is a call for GPs to become more attentive towards these patients. It may raise the suspicion of an impending serious disease but the increase is not so dramatic and unique that it can be interpreted a reliable sign of a malignant diagnosis. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-016-0477-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC4960682/ /pubmed/27456975 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-016-0477-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hauswaldt, Johannes
Hummers-Pradier, Eva
Himmel, Wolfgang
Does an increase in visits to general practice indicate a malignancy?
title Does an increase in visits to general practice indicate a malignancy?
title_full Does an increase in visits to general practice indicate a malignancy?
title_fullStr Does an increase in visits to general practice indicate a malignancy?
title_full_unstemmed Does an increase in visits to general practice indicate a malignancy?
title_short Does an increase in visits to general practice indicate a malignancy?
title_sort does an increase in visits to general practice indicate a malignancy?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4960682/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27456975
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-016-0477-0
work_keys_str_mv AT hauswaldtjohannes doesanincreaseinvisitstogeneralpracticeindicateamalignancy
AT hummerspradiereva doesanincreaseinvisitstogeneralpracticeindicateamalignancy
AT himmelwolfgang doesanincreaseinvisitstogeneralpracticeindicateamalignancy