-
- Sophie Chima, Javiera Martinez Gutierrez, Barbara Hunter, Adrian Laughlin, Patty Chondros, Natalie Lumsden, Douglas Boyle, Craig Nelson, Paul Amores, An Duy Tran, Jo-Anne Manski-Nankervis, and Jon Emery.
- The University of Melbourne Centre for Cancer Research, Department of General Practice and Primary Care, Melbourne, Australia s.chima@unimelb.edu.au.
- Br J Gen Pract. 2024 Nov 20.
UnlabelledBackground: Diagnosing cancer in general practice is complex, given the non-specific nature of many presenting symptoms and the overlap of potential diagnoses. This trial evaluated the effectiveness of a technology, Future Health Today (FHT), which provides clinical decision support, auditing, and quality improvement monitoring, on the appropriate follow-up of patients at risk of undiagnosed cancer.MethodsPragmatic, cluster randomised trial in Australian general practice. Practices were randomly assigned to receive recommendations for follow-up investigations for cancer (FHT cancer module) or the active control. Algorithms were applied to the electronic medical record and used demographic information and abnormal test results that are associated with risk of undiagnosed cancer (anaemia/iron-deficiency, thrombocytosis and raised PSA) to identify patients requiring further investigation and provide recommendations for care. The intervention consisted of the FHT cancer module, a case-based learning series and ongoing practice support. Using intention-to-treat approach, between arms difference in the proportion of patients with abnormal test results followed-up according to guidelines was determined at 12-months.Results7555 patients were identified as at risk of undiagnosed cancer. At 12-months post-randomisation, 76.2% of patients in the intervention arm had received recommended follow-up (21 practices, n=2820/3709), compared to 70% in the control arm (19 practices, n=2693/3846; estimated between arm difference in percentages=2.6%, 95% CI -2.8% to 7.9%; odds ratio=1.15, 95% CI 0.87-1.53; p=0.332).ConclusionsThe FHT cancer module intervention did not increase the proportion of patients receiving guideline-concordant care. The proportion of patients receiving recommended followed-up was high, suggesting a possible ceiling effect for the intervention.Copyright © 2024, The Authors.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.