scholarly journals Barriers and explanatory mechanisms in diagnostic delay in four cancers – A health-care disparity?

2019 ◽  
Vol 08 (04) ◽  
pp. 221-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abhishek Basu ◽  
Debjit Ghosh ◽  
Bidyut Mandal ◽  
Pratyusha Mukherjee ◽  
Avik Maji
Keyword(s):  
Head And Neck ◽  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Diagnostic Delay ◽  
Treatment Delay ◽  
Definitive Treatment ◽  
Stage Migration ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Initiation Increase ◽  
Centered Care

Abstract Introduction: Most cancer disparities research has traditionally focused on two key outcomes, access to appropriate treatment and survival, but they do not encompass important aspects of patient-centered care such as the timeliness of diagnosis and treatment. Prolonged time intervals between symptom onset and treatment initiation increase the risk of poorer clinical outcomes and are associated with worse patient experience of subsequent cancer care. This study aims to assess the delay from symptom onset to the start of definitive treatment and to identify the possible contributory factors and its impact on response in cancers of head and neck, breast, cervix, and lung. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study of patients enrolled between 2015 and 2017. A questionnaire was filled in about socioeconomic aspects, patient history, tumor data, professionals who evaluated the patients, and the respective time delays. Statistical test included Mann–Whitney U test, univariate and multivariate test, and one-way ANOVA to evaluate the correlations. Results: Stage migration was significant with patient delay (P < 0.01). In head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and Carcinoma lung, a significant correlation was found between referral delay and residence (P < 0.01) and treatment delay and reason for referral (HNSCC only) (P = 0.04). Referral delay and treatment delay were correlated to response in breast and cervix, respectively (P < 0.01). Conclusion: Social awareness, regularly updating primary care physicians about alarming symptoms of cancer, developing guidelines to identify these symptoms, promoting continuity of care, and enabling access to specialist expertise through prompt referral should all help prevent delays in cancer diagnosis.

scholarly journals Diagnosis and treatment delay of head and neck cancers during COVID-19 era in a tertiary care academic hospital: what should we expect?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pietro De Luca ◽  
Antonella Bisogno ◽  
Vito Colacurcio ◽  
Pasquale Marra ◽  
Claudia Cassandro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Diagnostic Delay ◽  
Treatment Delay ◽  
Head And Neck Cancers ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Academic Hospital ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Since the spreading of SARS-CoV-2 from China, all deferrable medical activities have been suspended, to redirect resources for the management of COVID patients. The goal of this retrospective study was to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on head and neck cancers’ diagnosis in our Academic Hospital. Methods A retrospective analysis of patients treated for head and neck cancers between March 12 and November 1, 2020 was carried out, and we compared these data with the diagnoses of the same periods of the 5 previous years. Results 47 patients were included in this study. We observed a significative reduction in comparison with the same period of the previous 5 years. Conclusions Our findings suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with a decrease in the number of new H&N cancers diagnoses, and a substantial diagnostic delay can be attributable to COVID-19 control measures.

scholarly journals What Do Clinicians Who Deliver Maternity Services Think Patient-Centered Care Is and How Is That Different for Vulnerable Women? A Qualitative Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ted Adams ◽  
Dana Sarnak ◽  
Joy Lewis ◽  
Jeff Convissar ◽  
Scott S. Young
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Health Management ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Fee For Service ◽  
Institute Of Medicine ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Maternity Services ◽  
Centered Care

Background. Patient-centered care is said to have a myriad of benefits; however, there is a lack of agreement on what exactly it consists of and how clinicians should deliver it for the benefit of their patients. In the context of maternity services and in particular for vulnerable women, we explored how clinicians describe patient-centered care and how the concept is understood in their practice. Methods. We undertook a qualitative study using interviews and a focus group, based on an interview guide developed from various patient surveys focused around the following questions: (i) How do clinicians describe patient-centered care? (ii) How does being patient-centered affect how care is delivered? (iii) Is this different for vulnerable populations? And if so, how? We sampled obstetricians and gynecologists, midwives, primary care physicians, and physician assistants from a health management organization and fee for service clinician providers from two states in the US covering insured and Medicaid populations. Results. Building a relationship between clinician and patient is central to what clinicians believe patient-centered care is. Providing individually appropriate care, engaging family members, transferring information from clinician to patient and from patient to clinician, and actively engaging with patients are also key concepts. However, vulnerable women did not benefit from patient-centered care without first having some of their nonmedical needs met by their clinician. Discussion. Most providers did not cite the core concepts of patient-centered care as defined by the Institute of Medicine and others.

scholarly journals North East London coronavirus disease 2019 protocol for diagnostics in two-week wait head and neck cancer patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 134 (8) ◽  
pp. 680-683 ◽  
Author(s):  
E Warner ◽  
D W Scholfield ◽  
A Adams ◽  
P Richards ◽  
S Ali ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Neck Cancer ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Diagnostic Delay ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Risk Patients

AbstractBackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic requires urgent modification to existing head and neck cancer diagnosis and management practices. A protocol was established that utilises risk stratification, early investigation prior to clinical review and a reduction in aerosol generating procedures to lessen the risk of coronavirus disease 2019 spread.MethodsTwo-week wait referrals were stratified into low, intermediate and high risk. Low risk patients were referred back to primary care with advice; intermediate and high risk patients underwent investigation. Clinical encounters and aerosol generating procedures were minimised. A combined diagnostic and therapeutic surgical approach was undertaken where possible.ResultsForty-one patients were used to assess feasibility. Thirty-one per cent were low risk, 35 per cent were intermediate and 33 per cent were high risk. Thirty-three per cent were discharged with no imaging.ConclusionImplementing this protocol reduces the future burden on tertiary services, by empowering primary care physicians to re-refer low risk patients. The protocol is applicable across the UK and avoids diagnostic delay.

scholarly journals Quality conceptualization in the era of measurement: A qualitative study of primary care physicians in Medicare’s Merit-Based Incentive Payment System

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl Thomas Berdahl ◽  
Molly C Easterlin ◽  
Gery Ryan ◽  
Jack Needleman ◽  
Teryl K Nuckols
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Pay For Performance ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Payment System ◽  
Incentive Payment ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
Quality In Healthcare

Abstract Background: While governmental programs seeking to improve the quality and value of healthcare through pay-for-performance initiatives have good intentions, participating physicians may be reluctant to participate for various reasons, including poor program alignment with considerations relevant to daily clinical practice. In this study, we sought to characterize how primary care physicians (PCPs) participating in Medicare’s Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) conceptualize the quality of healthcare to help inform future measurement strategies that physicians would understand and appreciate.Methods: We performed semi-structured qualitative interviews with a nationwide sample of 20 PCPs participating in MIPS who were trained in internal medicine or family medicine. We asked PCPs how they would characterize quality in healthcare and what distinguished exceptional, good, and poor quality from one another. Interviews were transcribed and two coders independently read transcripts, allowing data to emerge from the interviews and developing theories about the data. The coders met intermittently to discuss findings, harmonize the coding scheme, develop a final list of themes and sub-themes, and aggregate a list of representative quotations.Results: Participants described quality in healthcare as consisting of two components: (1) evidence-based care that is safe, which included appropriate health maintenance and chronic disease control, accurate diagnoses, and adherence to guidelines and (2) patient-centered care, which included spending enough time with patients, responding to patient concerns, and establishing long-term patient-physician relationships that were founded upon trust. Conclusions: PCPs consider patient-centered care to be necessary for the provision of exceptional quality in healthcare. Program administrators for quality measurement and pay-for-performance programs should explore new ways to reward PCPs for providing outstanding patient-centered care. Future research should be undertaken to determine whether patient-centered activities such as forging long-term, favorable patient-physician relationships, are associated with improved health outcomes.

The Role of Shared Decision-Making in Audiologic Rehabilitation

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Pryce ◽  
Amanda Hall
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Behavior Changes ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Treatment Information ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
Potential Risks ◽  
Audiologic Rehabilitation

Shared decision-making (SDM), a component of patient-centered care, is the process in which the clinician and patient both participate in decision-making about treatment; information is shared between the parties and both agree with the decision. Shared decision-making is appropriate for health care conditions in which there is more than one evidence-based treatment or management option that have different benefits and risks. The patient's involvement ensures that the decisions regarding treatment are sensitive to the patient's values and preferences. Audiologic rehabilitation requires substantial behavior changes on the part of patients and includes benefits to their communication as well as compromises and potential risks. This article identifies the importance of shared decision-making in audiologic rehabilitation and the changes required to implement it effectively.

Principles of Solution Focused Therapy and Their Application to Audiology

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-33
Author(s):  
James C. Blair
Keyword(s):  
Basic Assumption ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
Helping Professions ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Therapy Approach ◽  
Agents Of Change ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
Client Centered Therapy ◽  
Solution Focused ◽  
Solution Focused Therapy

The concept of client-centered therapy (Rogers, 1951) has influenced many professions to refocus their treatment of clients from assessment outcomes to the person who uses the information from this assessment. The term adopted for use in the professions of Communication Sciences and Disorders and encouraged by The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) is patient-centered care, with the goal of helping professions, like audiology, focus more centrally on the patient. The purpose of this paper is to examine some of the principles used in a patient-centered therapy approach first described by de Shazer (1985) named Solution-Focused Therapy and how these principles might apply to the practice of audiology. The basic assumption behind this model is that people are the agents of change and the professional is there to help guide and enable clients to make the change the client wants to make. This model then is focused on solutions, not on the problems. It is postulated that by using the assumptions in this model audiologists will be more effective in a shorter time than current practice may allow.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document