scholarly journals Opportunities and challenges of a novel cardiac output response to stress (CORS) test to enhance diagnosis of heart failure in primary care: a qualitative study

2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp19X703421
Author(s):  
Sarah Charman ◽  
Nduka Okwose ◽  
Gregory Maniatopoulos ◽  
Sara Graziadio ◽  
Luke Vale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Secondary Care ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Clinical Test ◽  
Output Response ◽  
Response To Stress

BackgroundPrimary care physicians lack access to an objective cardiac function test during diagnostic testing for suspected heart failure.AimTo determine the role of the novel Cardiac Output Response to Stress (CORS) test in the current diagnostic pathway for heart failure and the opportunities and challenges to potential implementation in primary care.MethodQualitative study using semi-structured in-depth interviews which were audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim. Data from the interviews were analysed thematically using an inductive approach. Fourteen healthcare professionals (six males, eight females) from primary (GPs, nurses, healthcare assistants, and practice managers) and secondary care (consultant cardiologists) participated.ResultsFour themes relating to opportunities and challenges surrounding the implementation of the new diagnostic technology were identified. These reflected that adoption of CORS test would be an advantage to primary care but the test had barriers to implementation which include establishment of clinical utility, suitability for immobile patients, and cost implication to GP practices.ConclusionThe development of a simple non-invasive clinical test to accelerate the diagnosis of heart failure in primary care maybe helpful to reduce unnecessary referrals to secondary care. The CORS test has the potential to serve this purpose however, factors such as cost-effectiveness, diagnostic accuracy, and seamless implementation in primary care have to be fully explored.

scholarly journals Opportunities and challenges of a novel cardiac output response to stress (CORS) test to enhance diagnosis of heart failure in primary care: qualitative study

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. e028122
Author(s):  
Sarah Charman ◽  
Nduka Okwose ◽  
Gregory Maniatopoulos ◽  
Sara Graziadio ◽  
Tamara Metzler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Secondary Care ◽  
Clinical Test ◽  
Output Response ◽  
Diagnostic Technology ◽  
Response To Stress ◽  
Barriers To Implementation

ObjectiveTo explore the role of the novel cardiac output response to stress (CORS), test in the current diagnostic pathway for heart failure and the opportunities and challenges to potential implementation in primary care.DesignQualitative study using semistructured in-depth interviews which were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data from the interviews were analysed thematically using an inductive approach.SettingNewcastle upon Tyne, UK.ParticipantsFourteen healthcare professionals (six males, eight females) from primary (general practitioners (GPs), nurses, healthcare assistant, practice managers) and secondary care (consultant cardiologists).ResultsFour themes relating to opportunities and challenges surrounding the implementation of the new diagnostic technology were identified. These reflected that the adoption of CORS test would be an advantage to primary care but the test had barriers to implementation which include: establishment of clinical utility, suitability for immobile patients and cost implication to GP practices.ConclusionThe development of a simple non-invasive clinical test to accelerate the diagnosis of heart failure in primary care maybe helpful to reduce unnecessary referrals to secondary care. The CORS test has the potential to serve this purpose; however, factors such as cost effectiveness, diagnostic accuracy and seamless implementation in primary care have to be fully explored.

Reproducibility of a simple cardiac output response to stress test to diagnose and monitor heart failure in a primary care setting

2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp18X697109
Author(s):  
Djordje Jakovljevic ◽  
Sarah J Charman ◽  
Nduka C Okwose ◽  
Renae J Stefanetti ◽  
Kristian Bailey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Stress Test ◽  
Standing Position ◽  
Output Response ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Response To Stress ◽  
One Step ◽  
Lower Limits

BackgroundWe developed a simple non-invasive Cardiac Output Response to Stress (CORS) Test to improve diagnosis and monitoring of heart failure in primary care.AimThe aim of the present study was to assess test-retest reproducibility of the CORS test.MethodThirty-two healthy volunteers (age, 64±10, female n=18) were recruited. Cardiac output was measured continuously using bioreactance method in supine and standing position, and during a two 3-min stages of a step-exercise protocol (10 and 15 steps per minute) using a 15-cm height bench. The CORS test was performed twice i.e. Test 1 and Test 2.ResultsCardiac output and stroke volume were not significantly different between the two tests at supine (6.2±1.4 versus 6.3±1.7 L/min, P = 0.84; 102±24 versus 108±32 ml/beat, P = 0.36), standing (5.7±2.1 versus 5.7±1.9 L/min, P = 0.99; 82±32 versus 83±29 ml/beat, P = 0.93), stage one step-exercise (8.5± 1.8 versus 8.2±1.9 L/min, P = 0.56; 104±26 versus 104±27 ml/beat, P = 0.99) and stage two step-exercise (9.9±1.7 versus 9.6±2.0 L/min, P = 0.51; 109±29 versus 111±26 ml/beat, P = 0.76). There was a significant positive relationship between Test 1 and Test 2 cardiac outputs (r=0.92, P<0.01 with coefficient of variation of 7.1%). The mean difference in cardiac output (with upper and lower limits of agreement) between Test 1 and Test 2 was 0.1 (−1.9 to 2.1) L/min, combining rest and exercise data.ConclusionThe CORS test demonstrates acceptable reproducibility and can potentially be used in primary care to identify and monitor heart failure.

scholarly journals A novel cardiac output response to stress test developed to improve diagnosis and monitoring of heart failure in primary care

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 703-712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah J. Charman ◽  
Nduka C. Okwose ◽  
Renae J. Stefanetti ◽  
Kristian Bailey ◽  
Jane Skinner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Stress Test ◽  
Output Response ◽  
Response To Stress

How can Primary Care Physicians Best Support Contraceptive Decision Making? A Qualitative Study Exploring the Perspectives of Baltimore Latinas

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana N. Carvajal ◽  
Deborah Gioia ◽  
Estefania Rivera Mudafort ◽  
Pamela Bohrer Brown ◽  
Beth Barnet
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Primary Care Physicians

scholarly journals Transition from specialist to primary diabetes care: A qualitative study of perspectives of primary care physicians

2009 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon Brez ◽  
Margo Rowan ◽  
Janine Malcolm ◽  
Sheryl Izzi ◽  
Julie Maranger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Diabetes Care ◽  
Primary Care Physicians

Cardiac Output Response to Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in Congestive Heart Failure

1992 ◽  
Vol 145 (2_pt_1) ◽  
pp. 377-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Douglas Bradley ◽  
Richard M. Holloway ◽  
Peter R. McLaughlin ◽  
Bette L. Ross ◽  
Janice Walters ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Congestive Heart Failure ◽  
Cardiac Output ◽  
Continuous Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
Airway Pressure ◽  
Positive Airway Pressure ◽  
Output Response

Significant decline in cancer diagnostic testing in U.S. CMS population during the COVID-19 pandemic.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6536-6536
Author(s):  
Dave Smart ◽  
Peter Riccelli ◽  
Keith Kerr ◽  
Jordan Clark ◽  
Susanne Munksted Fosvig ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Delayed Diagnosis ◽  
Cancer Control ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Initial Diagnosis ◽  
Test Volume ◽  
The Us

6536 Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused >400,000 infection related deaths in the US to January 2021. Actions taken to limit COVID-19 infection and mortality could potentially lead to unintended consequences, precipitating excess mortality due to other causes. One such cause is delayed cancer diagnosis. Significant decreases in presentation for cancer diagnosis at the primary care level have been noted in the UK. This study aimed to look for evidence of a similar effect in the US. Methods: CMS claims data from JAN18-JUN20 associated with primary diagnosis across 11 cancers (bladder, breast, cervical, colorectal, endometrial, lung, ovarian, pancreatic, prostate, sarcoma and thyroid) were analyzed for use of surgical pathology (SP), a procedure associated with initial diagnosis, and immunohistochemistry (IHC). Test volumes varied widely by test and cancer so were normalized to enable comparison across indications. This was done by dividing the month-on-month difference for the period JAN19-JUN19 vs JAN20-JUN20 by the median monthly test volume for the period JAN18-DEC19 (“pre-COVID period”). Extent and duration of declines in test rates and number of missing patients as the sum of these declines were then determined. The ratio of IHC to SP testing was taken to determine any decline in likely post-initial diagnosis testing. Results: There were significant (>10%) declines in test volumes for SP for all 11 cancers at some time in Q1-Q2 2020. Table. Extent, duration and return to pre-COVID levels for SP testing across 11 cancers Median extent and duration of the decline was 56% (range 41.1%-80.4%) and 2 months (range 1- >4). This equates to 32,192 missing diagnoses across all cancers. SP test volumes for all cancers except lung and breast had returned to around pre-COVID levels by JUN20. There was no significant (>10%) increase in normalized SP test volume after the COVID dip for any cancer. While SP showed decreased test volumes across all cancers at some point during the first half of 2020, test volume ratios of IHC to SP showed increases for most cancers in the same time period. Conclusions: These data highlight that the decline in patients presenting to their primary care physicians with suspicion of cancer for diagnostic investigation was linked to COVID-19 prevention strategies. No evidence for increased, “catch up” testing to address presentational/diagnostic backlog was observed. Thus, it is predicted that these patients may subsequently present with a more advanced cancer. Potential excess morbidity, mortality and cost associated with absent or delayed diagnosis should be factored into cancer control programs going forward.[Table: see text]

The pathway to diagnosis and treatment for surgically managed lung cancer patients

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria White ◽  
Rebecca J Bergin ◽  
Robert J Thomas ◽  
Kathryn Whitfield ◽  
David Weller
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Secondary Care ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Treatment Time ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Diagnosis And Treatment ◽  
Early Stage Disease ◽  
Lung Cancer Patients

Abstract Background Most lung cancer is diagnosed at an advanced stage, resulting in poor survival. This study examined diagnostic pathways for patients with operable lung cancer to identify factors contributing to early diagnosis. Methods Surgically treated lung cancer patients (aged ≥40, within 6 months of diagnosis), approached via the population-based Cancer Registry, with their primary care physicians (PCPs) and specialists completed cross-sectional surveys assessing symptoms, diagnostic route (symptomatic or ‘investigation’ of other problem), tests, key event dates and treatment. Time intervals to diagnosis and treatment were determined, and quantile regression examined differences between the two diagnostic routes. Cox proportional hazard regression analyses examined associations between survival and diagnostic route adjusting for stage, sex and age. Results One hundred and ninety-two patients (36% response rate), 107 PCPs and 55 specialists participated. Fifty-eight per cent of patients had a symptomatic diagnostic route reporting an average of 1.6 symptoms, most commonly cough, fatigue or haemoptysis. Symptomatic patients had longer median primary care interval than ‘investigation’ patients (12 versus 9 days, P < 0.05) and were more likely to report their PCP first-ordered imaging tests. Secondary care interval was shorter for symptomatic (median = 43 days) than investigation (median = 62 days, P < 0.05) patients. However, 56% of all patients waited longer than national recommendations (6 weeks). While survival estimates were better for investigation than symptomatic patients, these differences were not significant. Conclusion Many operable lung cancer patients are diagnosed incidentally, highlighting the difficulty of symptom-based approaches to diagnosing early stage disease. Longer than recommended secondary care interval suggests the need for improvements in care pathways.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document