Cargando…

Rapid cancer diagnosis for patients with vague symptoms: a cost-effectiveness study

BACKGROUND: A pilot rapid diagnosis centre (RDC) allows GPs within targeted clusters to refer adults with vague and/or non-specific symptoms suspicious of cancer, who do not meet criteria for referral under an urgent suspected cancer (USC) pathway, to a multidisciplinary RDC clinic where they are se...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sewell, Bernadette, Jones, Mari, Gray, Helen, Wilkes, Heather, Lloyd-Bennett, Catherine, Beddow, Kim, Bevan, Martin, Fitzsimmons, Deborah
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Royal College of General Practitioners 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6960004/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31932296
http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgp20X708077
_version_ 1783487697232330752
author Sewell, Bernadette
Jones, Mari
Gray, Helen
Wilkes, Heather
Lloyd-Bennett, Catherine
Beddow, Kim
Bevan, Martin
Fitzsimmons, Deborah
author_facet Sewell, Bernadette
Jones, Mari
Gray, Helen
Wilkes, Heather
Lloyd-Bennett, Catherine
Beddow, Kim
Bevan, Martin
Fitzsimmons, Deborah
author_sort Sewell, Bernadette
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: A pilot rapid diagnosis centre (RDC) allows GPs within targeted clusters to refer adults with vague and/or non-specific symptoms suspicious of cancer, who do not meet criteria for referral under an urgent suspected cancer (USC) pathway, to a multidisciplinary RDC clinic where they are seen within 1 week. AIM: To explore the cost-effectiveness of the RDC compared with standard clinical practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cost-effectiveness modelling using routine data from Neath Port Talbot Hospital, Wales. METHOD: Discrete-event simulation modelled a cohort of 1000 patients from referral to radiological diagnosis based on routine RDC and hospital data. Control patients were those referred to a USC pathway but then downgraded. Published sources provided estimates of patient quality of life (QoL) and pre-diagnosis anxiety. The model calculates time to diagnosis, costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and estimates the probability of the RDC being a cost-effective strategy. RESULTS: The RDC reduces mean time to diagnosis from 84.2 days in usual care to 5.9 days if a diagnosis is made at clinic, or 40.8 days if further investigations are booked during RDC. RDC provision is the superior strategy (that is, less costly and more effective) compared with standard clinical practice when run near or at full capacity. However, it is not cost-effective if capacity utilisation drops below 80%. CONCLUSION: An RDC for patients presenting with vague or non-specific symptoms suspicious of cancer in primary care reduces time to diagnosis and provides excellent value for money if run at ≥80% capacity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6960004
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Royal College of General Practitioners
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69600042020-01-21 Rapid cancer diagnosis for patients with vague symptoms: a cost-effectiveness study Sewell, Bernadette Jones, Mari Gray, Helen Wilkes, Heather Lloyd-Bennett, Catherine Beddow, Kim Bevan, Martin Fitzsimmons, Deborah Br J Gen Pract Research BACKGROUND: A pilot rapid diagnosis centre (RDC) allows GPs within targeted clusters to refer adults with vague and/or non-specific symptoms suspicious of cancer, who do not meet criteria for referral under an urgent suspected cancer (USC) pathway, to a multidisciplinary RDC clinic where they are seen within 1 week. AIM: To explore the cost-effectiveness of the RDC compared with standard clinical practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cost-effectiveness modelling using routine data from Neath Port Talbot Hospital, Wales. METHOD: Discrete-event simulation modelled a cohort of 1000 patients from referral to radiological diagnosis based on routine RDC and hospital data. Control patients were those referred to a USC pathway but then downgraded. Published sources provided estimates of patient quality of life (QoL) and pre-diagnosis anxiety. The model calculates time to diagnosis, costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and estimates the probability of the RDC being a cost-effective strategy. RESULTS: The RDC reduces mean time to diagnosis from 84.2 days in usual care to 5.9 days if a diagnosis is made at clinic, or 40.8 days if further investigations are booked during RDC. RDC provision is the superior strategy (that is, less costly and more effective) compared with standard clinical practice when run near or at full capacity. However, it is not cost-effective if capacity utilisation drops below 80%. CONCLUSION: An RDC for patients presenting with vague or non-specific symptoms suspicious of cancer in primary care reduces time to diagnosis and provides excellent value for money if run at ≥80% capacity. Royal College of General Practitioners 2020-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6960004/ /pubmed/31932296 http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgp20X708077 Text en ©The Authors This article is pen Access: CC BY-NC 4.0 licence (http://creativecommons.org/licences/by-nc/4.0/).
spellingShingle Research
Sewell, Bernadette
Jones, Mari
Gray, Helen
Wilkes, Heather
Lloyd-Bennett, Catherine
Beddow, Kim
Bevan, Martin
Fitzsimmons, Deborah
Rapid cancer diagnosis for patients with vague symptoms: a cost-effectiveness study
title Rapid cancer diagnosis for patients with vague symptoms: a cost-effectiveness study
title_full Rapid cancer diagnosis for patients with vague symptoms: a cost-effectiveness study
title_fullStr Rapid cancer diagnosis for patients with vague symptoms: a cost-effectiveness study
title_full_unstemmed Rapid cancer diagnosis for patients with vague symptoms: a cost-effectiveness study
title_short Rapid cancer diagnosis for patients with vague symptoms: a cost-effectiveness study
title_sort rapid cancer diagnosis for patients with vague symptoms: a cost-effectiveness study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6960004/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31932296
http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgp20X708077
work_keys_str_mv AT sewellbernadette rapidcancerdiagnosisforpatientswithvaguesymptomsacosteffectivenessstudy
AT jonesmari rapidcancerdiagnosisforpatientswithvaguesymptomsacosteffectivenessstudy
AT grayhelen rapidcancerdiagnosisforpatientswithvaguesymptomsacosteffectivenessstudy
AT wilkesheather rapidcancerdiagnosisforpatientswithvaguesymptomsacosteffectivenessstudy
AT lloydbennettcatherine rapidcancerdiagnosisforpatientswithvaguesymptomsacosteffectivenessstudy
AT beddowkim rapidcancerdiagnosisforpatientswithvaguesymptomsacosteffectivenessstudy
AT bevanmartin rapidcancerdiagnosisforpatientswithvaguesymptomsacosteffectivenessstudy
AT fitzsimmonsdeborah rapidcancerdiagnosisforpatientswithvaguesymptomsacosteffectivenessstudy