Cargando…
Identifying patients with a history of ovarian cancer for referral for genetic counselling: non-randomised comparison of two case-finding strategies in primary care
BACKGROUND: Recent guidelines recommend genetic counselling and DNA testing (GCT) for patients with ovarian cancer and survivors of ovarian cancer. Finding survivors of ovarian cancer is challenging. Detecting and referring them for GCT via primary care, to allow proper screening recommendations for...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Royal College of General Practitioners
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6193781/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30348886 http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgp18X699533 |
_version_ | 1783364122931363840 |
---|---|
author | Helsper, Charles W Van Vliet, Liesbeth M Velthuizen, Mary E de Wit, Niek J Beijaert, Roy PH Butter, Els van Gent-Wagemakers, Marleen PL Witteveen, Els O Zweemer, Ronald P van Dulmen, Sandra M Ausems, Margreet GEM |
author_facet | Helsper, Charles W Van Vliet, Liesbeth M Velthuizen, Mary E de Wit, Niek J Beijaert, Roy PH Butter, Els van Gent-Wagemakers, Marleen PL Witteveen, Els O Zweemer, Ronald P van Dulmen, Sandra M Ausems, Margreet GEM |
author_sort | Helsper, Charles W |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Recent guidelines recommend genetic counselling and DNA testing (GCT) for patients with ovarian cancer and survivors of ovarian cancer. Finding survivors of ovarian cancer is challenging. Detecting and referring them for GCT via primary care, to allow proper screening recommendations for patients and their family, may be a solution. AIM: To compare the effectiveness and acceptance of two pilot strategies directed at case finding women with a history of ovarian cancer for referral for GCT by their GP. DESIGN AND SETTING: Non-randomised comparison of the pilot implementation of two case-finding strategies for women with a history of ovarian cancer in Dutch primary care from May 2016 to April 2017. METHOD: Strategy A (unsupported) asked GPs to identify and refer eligible patients with a history of ovarian cancer. Strategy B (ICT-supported) provided GPs with information and communication technology (ICT) support to identify patients with a history of ovarian cancer electronically. The effectiveness of each strategy was assessed as the proportion of patients who were approached, referred for GCT, and seen by the clinical geneticist. Acceptance of each strategy was assessed by the intervention uptake of GP practices and GP and patient questionnaires. RESULTS: Nineteen out of 30 (63%) patients identified with a history of ovarian cancer were deemed eligible for referral for strategy A, and 39 out of 94 (41%) for strategy B. For each strategy, eight patients were referred and five (63%) were seen for GCT. The intervention uptake by GP practices was 31% (11 out of 36) for strategy A and 46% (21 out of 46) for strategy B. GPs considered ‘relevance’ and ‘workability’ as facilitators across both strategies whereas, for strategy B, technical barriers hindered implementation. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness and acceptance of both strategies for case finding of survivors of ovarian cancer in primary care for GCT is promising, but larger studies are required before wide-scale implementation is warranted. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6193781 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Royal College of General Practitioners |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61937812018-11-06 Identifying patients with a history of ovarian cancer for referral for genetic counselling: non-randomised comparison of two case-finding strategies in primary care Helsper, Charles W Van Vliet, Liesbeth M Velthuizen, Mary E de Wit, Niek J Beijaert, Roy PH Butter, Els van Gent-Wagemakers, Marleen PL Witteveen, Els O Zweemer, Ronald P van Dulmen, Sandra M Ausems, Margreet GEM Br J Gen Pract Research BACKGROUND: Recent guidelines recommend genetic counselling and DNA testing (GCT) for patients with ovarian cancer and survivors of ovarian cancer. Finding survivors of ovarian cancer is challenging. Detecting and referring them for GCT via primary care, to allow proper screening recommendations for patients and their family, may be a solution. AIM: To compare the effectiveness and acceptance of two pilot strategies directed at case finding women with a history of ovarian cancer for referral for GCT by their GP. DESIGN AND SETTING: Non-randomised comparison of the pilot implementation of two case-finding strategies for women with a history of ovarian cancer in Dutch primary care from May 2016 to April 2017. METHOD: Strategy A (unsupported) asked GPs to identify and refer eligible patients with a history of ovarian cancer. Strategy B (ICT-supported) provided GPs with information and communication technology (ICT) support to identify patients with a history of ovarian cancer electronically. The effectiveness of each strategy was assessed as the proportion of patients who were approached, referred for GCT, and seen by the clinical geneticist. Acceptance of each strategy was assessed by the intervention uptake of GP practices and GP and patient questionnaires. RESULTS: Nineteen out of 30 (63%) patients identified with a history of ovarian cancer were deemed eligible for referral for strategy A, and 39 out of 94 (41%) for strategy B. For each strategy, eight patients were referred and five (63%) were seen for GCT. The intervention uptake by GP practices was 31% (11 out of 36) for strategy A and 46% (21 out of 46) for strategy B. GPs considered ‘relevance’ and ‘workability’ as facilitators across both strategies whereas, for strategy B, technical barriers hindered implementation. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness and acceptance of both strategies for case finding of survivors of ovarian cancer in primary care for GCT is promising, but larger studies are required before wide-scale implementation is warranted. Royal College of General Practitioners 2018-11 2018-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6193781/ /pubmed/30348886 http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgp18X699533 Text en © British Journal of General Practice 2018 This article is Open Access: CC BY-NC 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Research Helsper, Charles W Van Vliet, Liesbeth M Velthuizen, Mary E de Wit, Niek J Beijaert, Roy PH Butter, Els van Gent-Wagemakers, Marleen PL Witteveen, Els O Zweemer, Ronald P van Dulmen, Sandra M Ausems, Margreet GEM Identifying patients with a history of ovarian cancer for referral for genetic counselling: non-randomised comparison of two case-finding strategies in primary care |
title | Identifying patients with a history of ovarian cancer for referral for genetic counselling: non-randomised comparison of two case-finding strategies in primary care |
title_full | Identifying patients with a history of ovarian cancer for referral for genetic counselling: non-randomised comparison of two case-finding strategies in primary care |
title_fullStr | Identifying patients with a history of ovarian cancer for referral for genetic counselling: non-randomised comparison of two case-finding strategies in primary care |
title_full_unstemmed | Identifying patients with a history of ovarian cancer for referral for genetic counselling: non-randomised comparison of two case-finding strategies in primary care |
title_short | Identifying patients with a history of ovarian cancer for referral for genetic counselling: non-randomised comparison of two case-finding strategies in primary care |
title_sort | identifying patients with a history of ovarian cancer for referral for genetic counselling: non-randomised comparison of two case-finding strategies in primary care |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6193781/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30348886 http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgp18X699533 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT helspercharlesw identifyingpatientswithahistoryofovariancancerforreferralforgeneticcounsellingnonrandomisedcomparisonoftwocasefindingstrategiesinprimarycare AT vanvlietliesbethm identifyingpatientswithahistoryofovariancancerforreferralforgeneticcounsellingnonrandomisedcomparisonoftwocasefindingstrategiesinprimarycare AT velthuizenmarye identifyingpatientswithahistoryofovariancancerforreferralforgeneticcounsellingnonrandomisedcomparisonoftwocasefindingstrategiesinprimarycare AT dewitniekj identifyingpatientswithahistoryofovariancancerforreferralforgeneticcounsellingnonrandomisedcomparisonoftwocasefindingstrategiesinprimarycare AT beijaertroyph identifyingpatientswithahistoryofovariancancerforreferralforgeneticcounsellingnonrandomisedcomparisonoftwocasefindingstrategiesinprimarycare AT butterels identifyingpatientswithahistoryofovariancancerforreferralforgeneticcounsellingnonrandomisedcomparisonoftwocasefindingstrategiesinprimarycare AT vangentwagemakersmarleenpl identifyingpatientswithahistoryofovariancancerforreferralforgeneticcounsellingnonrandomisedcomparisonoftwocasefindingstrategiesinprimarycare AT witteveenelso identifyingpatientswithahistoryofovariancancerforreferralforgeneticcounsellingnonrandomisedcomparisonoftwocasefindingstrategiesinprimarycare AT zweemerronaldp identifyingpatientswithahistoryofovariancancerforreferralforgeneticcounsellingnonrandomisedcomparisonoftwocasefindingstrategiesinprimarycare AT vandulmensandram identifyingpatientswithahistoryofovariancancerforreferralforgeneticcounsellingnonrandomisedcomparisonoftwocasefindingstrategiesinprimarycare AT ausemsmargreetgem identifyingpatientswithahistoryofovariancancerforreferralforgeneticcounsellingnonrandomisedcomparisonoftwocasefindingstrategiesinprimarycare |