Assessing breast cancer risk in primary care: What can we learn from cardiovascular disease?

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1559-1559
Author(s):  
Kelly-Anne Phillips ◽  
Louise A. Keogh ◽  
Emma Steel ◽  
Ian M. Collins ◽  
Jon Emery ◽  
...  

1559 Background: Routine assessment of breast cancer (BC) risk by primary care clinicians (PCCs) might improve uptake of BC prevention and screening interventions, thus reducing morbidity and mortality as has occurred for cardiovascular (CV) disease. Methods: Australian PCCs were recruited through local professional networks. Facilitated focus group discussions about current practice of assessing and managing BC risk were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim and managed using QSR NVivo qualitative data management software. A coding framework was developed based on the transcripts, data were coded and each code further analyzed to identify key themes. Results: 17 PCCs (12 doctors, 5 practice nurses) participated in 2 focus groups. 41% were male, median age 49 years, median number of years in practice was 15. Approaches to assessment and management of BC risk differed markedly from that of CV risk. PCCs see assessment and management of CV risk as an intrinsic, expected part of their role. Practice software prompts trigger CV risk assessment and PCCs often use an online tool (www.knowyournumbers.co.nz) to provide personalized risk estimates and to discuss management options for CV risk. Conversely, assessment of BC risk is not routine or prompted by practice software, is generally patient (not clinician) initiated, and management, beyond routine BC screening (e.g. chemoprevention), is considered outside the PCCs domain. Most PCCs are not familiar with, or using, BC risk assessment tools. PCCs suggested they could potentially routinely assess and manage BC risk. Such an approach would need to be widely endorsed as within the remit of primary care and would be enhanced by an online tool that is accessible, quick, visual (graphs and pictograms), evidence-based and regularly updated. Ideally, its use would be prompted by their practice software. Conclusions: There is a clear opportunity in primary care to enhance the capacity and motivation of clinicians to assess and manage BC risk. A risk assessment and decision aid tool, integrated into primary care software, might facilitate routine appropriate management of BC risk in the Australian primary care setting, modelling what has already been achieved for CV disease.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (26_suppl) ◽  
pp. 17-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian M. Collins ◽  
Louise A. Keogh ◽  
Emma Steel ◽  
Jon Emery ◽  
Marie Pirotta ◽  
...  

17 Background: Routine assessment of breast cancer (BC) risk by primary care clinicians (PCCs) might improve uptake of (BC) prevention and screening interventions and thus reduce morbidity and mortality. Methods: Australian PCCs were recruited through local professional networks. Facilitated focus group discussions about current practice of assessing and managing BC risk were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim and managed using QSR NVivo qualitative data management software. A coding framework was developed based on the transcripts, data was coded and each code further analyzed to identify key themes. Results: 17 PCCs (12 doctors, 5 practice nurses) participated in 2 focus groups. 41% were male, median age 49 years, median number of years as a PCC was 15. Approaches to assessment and management of BC risk differed markedly from that of cardiovascular (CV) risk. PCCs see assessment and management of CV risk as an intrinsic, expected part of their role. Sidebar prompts on practice software trigger CV risk assessment and PCCs often use an online tool (www.knowyournumbers.co.nz) to provide personalized risk estimates and to discuss management options for CV risk. Conversely, assessment of BC risk is haphazard, generally patient (not clinician) initiated, and management, beyond routine BC screening (e.g. chemoprevention), is considered outside the domain of the PCC. BC risk assessment is not prompted by practice software. Most PCCs are not familiar with, or using, BC risk assessment tools. PCCs suggested they could potentially routinely assess and manage BC risk, but such an approach would need to be widely endorsed as within the remit of primary care and would be enhanced by an online tool that is accessible, quick, visual (graphs and pictograms), evidence-based and regularly updated. Ideally, its use would be prompted by their practice software. Conclusions: There is a clear opportunity in primary care to enhance the capacity and motivation of clinicians to assess and manage BC risk. A risk assessment and decision aid tool, integrated into primary care software, might facilitate routine appropriate management of BC risk in the Australian primary care setting, modelling what has already been achieved for CV disease.


2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly-Anne Phillips ◽  
Emma J. Steel ◽  
Ian Collins ◽  
Jon Emery ◽  
Marie Pirotta ◽  
...  

To capitalise on advances in breast cancer prevention, all women would need to have their breast cancer risk formally assessed. With ~85% of Australians attending primary care clinics at least once a year, primary care is an opportune location for formal breast cancer risk assessment and management. This study assessed the current practice and needs of primary care clinicians regarding assessment and management of breast cancer risk. Two facilitated focus group discussions were held with 17 primary care clinicians (12 GPs and 5 practice nurses (PNs)) as part of a larger needs assessment. Primary care clinicians viewed assessment and management of cardiovascular risk as an intrinsic, expected part of their role, often triggered by practice software prompts and facilitated by use of an online tool. Conversely, assessment of breast cancer risk was not routine and was generally patient- (not clinician-) initiated, and risk management (apart from routine screening) was considered outside the primary care domain. Clinicians suggested that routine assessment and management of breast cancer risk might be achieved if it were widely endorsed as within the remit of primary care and supported by an online risk-assessment and decision aid tool that was integrated into primary care software. This study identified several key issues that would need to be addressed to facilitate the transition to routine assessment and management of breast cancer risk in primary care, based largely on the model used for cardiovascular disease.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eda Saatciler ◽  
Diane Gillooly ◽  
Bernard Toro ◽  
Peter Lontai

Abstract Abstract Background/Purpose: Osteoporosis (OP)was first identified and named by healthcare professionals in the 18th century. Today, OP is still the source of fractures which impair mobility, leading to sub-acute stays at rehabilitation centers. A major obstacle is that primary care providers (PCPs) fail to identify warning signs of OP, and inform patients that Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DEXA) scans that are one of the best procedures to assess bone health. This project addressed the issue of low rate of referrals for DEXA scans. Theoretical Framework: The Knowledge-to-Action (KTA) model was used to guide this study. Intervention: Implementation of osteoporosis risk assessment instrument. Methods (Design, Sample, Setting, Measures, Analysis): This includes pre-implementation phase, patients’ charts were reviewed; post-implementation phase, the number of people referred to have DEXA scans were analyzed; the evaluation phase, results compared to the previous data. The project focus exclusively on women and men ages 50 to 89 years in two primary care offices in New Jersey. Descriptive analyses concentrated on whether or not ORAI was the tool to increase DEXA scans. Results: The data analysis reflected that the baseline referral rates increased from 1.3 % to 42 % and patients who scored high on the risk assessment instrument have been referred more often than not. Moreover, patients who are at risk and younger than 65 years of age, risk assessment tools led to a positive referral for a DEXA scan. Those who are older than 65 years, risk assessment tools like ORAI should be given with fracture risk assessment tools. This is especially the case when dealing with men, a demographic group often overlooked in the fight against OP. Conclusions Implications: If this project is to be applied at other clinics, more and more patients would be referred, raising awareness of the medical benefits of early detection. Reasonably, covering a broader section of patients, earlier in their lives, will increase clinical income, bringing more patients to primary care offices.


2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (9) ◽  
pp. 438-443
Author(s):  
Karen Harrison-Dening

While patients diagnosed with dementia will require management from specialist neurology clinics, practice nurses play an important role in their health. Karen Harrison-Dening explains what assessment tools are available for patients with particular health needs The majority of patients are diagnosed in a memory assessment service or a neurology clinic. However, early detection of a possible dementia is often done in a primary care setting. Dementia diagnosis has been seen by some as a ‘tick-box exercise’ but there are significant benefits to patients and their families when screening or testing for dementia is carried out early, especially in supporting the patients management of other comorbid or long-term conditions. Nurses working in primary care have a key role in identifying patients who may have the signs and symptoms of dementia by enabling them to access a timely diagnosis.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (1 suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 232-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernanda Sales Luiz Vianna ◽  
Juliana Giacomazzi ◽  
Cristina Brinckmann Oliveira Netto ◽  
Luciana Neves Nunes ◽  
Maira Caleffi ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document