Search

Background: The introduction of new tools can bring unintended consequences for organizational routines. Cancer Patient Pathways (CPP) were introduced into the Swedish healthcare system in 2015 to shorten time to diagnosis and treatment. Primary healthcare (PHC) plays a central role since cancer diagnosis often begins in PHC units. Our study aimed to understand how PHC units adjusted organizational routines to utilizing CPPs., Method: Six PHC units of varied size from both urban and rural areas in northern Sweden were included. Grounded theory method was used to collect and analyse group interviews at each unit. Nine group interviews with nurses and physicians, for a total of 41 participants, were performed between March and November 2019. The interviews focused on CPPs as tools, the PHC units' routines and providers' experiences with using CPPs in their daily work., Results: Our analysis captured how PHC units adjusted organizational routines to utilizing CPPs by fusing existing practices with new practices to offer better quality of care. Specifically, three overarching organizational routines within the PHC units were identified. First, Manoeuvring diverse patient needs with easier patient flow, the PHC units handled the diverse needs of the population while simultaneously drawing upon CPPs to ease the patient flow within the healthcare system. Second, (Dis) integrating internal know-how, the PHC units drew upon internal competence even when PHC know-how was not taken into account by those driving the CPP initiative. Third, Coping with unequal relationships toward secondary care, the PHC units dealt with being in an unequal position while adopting CPPs instead further decreased possibilities to influence decision-making between care-levels., Conclusion: Adopting CPPs as a tool within PHC units brought various unintended consequences in organizational routines. Our study from northern Sweden illustrates that the PHC know-how needs to be integrated into the healthcare system to improve the use of new tools as CPP. Further, the relationships between different levels of care should be taken in account when introducing new tools for healthcare. Also, when adopting innovations, unintended consequences need to be further explored empirically in diverse healthcare contexts internationally in order to generate deeper knowledge in the research area., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objective: We aim to explore how GPs assign meanings and act upon patients' symptoms in primary care encounters in the context of standardized cancer patient pathways (CPPs). Design, setting and subjects: Thirteen individual interviews were conducted with GPs, at primary healthcare centers ( n  = 4) in one county in northern Sweden. Interviews were analyzed using grounded theory method. The results were then linked to symbolic interactionism. Main outcome measures: GPs' perspectives about assigning meanings to patients' presented symptoms and perception about CPPs. Results: In the encounter, GPs engaged in two simultaneous interactions, one with patients' symptoms - and the other with CPPs. The core category Disentangling patients' care trajectory consists of three categories, interpreted as GPs' strategies developed to assign meaning to symptoms. These strategies are carried out not in a straightforward manner but rather in a conflicting way, illuminating the complexity of GPs' daily work. Conclusions: Interacting with patients is vital for assigning meaning to presented symptoms. However, nowadays GPs are not only required to interact with patients, they are also required to interact with CPPs. These standardized routines might create pressure and demands on GPs, especially for those experiencing a lack of information about CPPs. Beside of carrying out the challenging patient/person-centered dialogues and interpreting presented symptoms, GPs also need to link the interpreted symptoms to CPPs. Therefore, it is essential that GPs are given opportunities at their workplaces to continuously be informed and be supported in order to practice CPPs and thereby optimize trajectories for patients undergoing cancer diagnostics.Key points Current awareness: • GPs deliberation about patients' trajectories is a complex process, often dealing with vague symptoms. How CPPs influence this process within the encounter has not been studied. Main statements:  • GPs in our study were involved in two simultaneous interactions, one with patients' symptoms in the encounter - and the other with CPPs within the healthcare organization. • Symbolic interactionism helped capture how GPs deliberated about conflicting and paradoxical aspects of the encounter, in terms of balancing two contradictory ways of action that GPs face when providing patient/person-centered care and linking to CPPs. • Based on our results, primary care needs support from healthcare organizations to build capacity about CPPs and how to use them.

Objectives: To illuminate patterns observed in International Cancer Benchmarking Programme studies by extending understanding of the various influences on presentation and referral with cancer symptoms., Design: Cross-country comparison of Denmark, England and Sweden with qualitative analysis of in-depth interview accounts of the prediagnostic process in lung or bowel cancer., Participants: 155 women and men, aged between 35 and 86 years old, diagnosed with lung or bowel cancer in 6 months before interview., Setting: Participants recruited through primary and secondary care, social media and word of mouth. Interviews collected by social scientists or nurse researchers during 2015, mainly in participants' homes., Results: Participants reported difficulties in interpreting diffuse bodily sensations and symptoms and deciding when to consult. There were examples of swift referrals by primary care professionals in all three countries. In all countries, participants described difficulty deciding if and when to consult, highlighting concerns about access to general practitioner appointments and overstretched primary care services, although this appears less prominent in the Swedish data. It was not unusual for there to be more than one consultation before referral and we noted two distinct patterns of repeated consultation: (1) situations where the participant left the primary care consultation with a plan of action about what should happen next; (2) participants were unclear about under which conditions to return to the doctors. This second pattern sometimes extended over many weeks during which patients described uncertainty, and sometimes frustration, about if and when they should return and whether there were any other feasible investigations. The latter pattern appeared more evident in the interviews in England and Denmark than Sweden., Conclusion: We suggest that if clear action plans, as part of safety netting, were routinely used in primary care consultations then uncertainty, false reassurance and the inefficiency and distress of multiple consultations could be reduced., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Diagnosis of cancer is challenging in primary care due to the low incidence of cancer cases in primary care practice. A prolonged diagnostic interval may be due to doctor, patient or system factors, or may be due to the characteristics of the cancer itself. The objective of this study was to learn from Primary Care Physicians' (PCP) experiences of incidents when they had failed to think of, or act on, a cancer diagnosis. A qualitative, online survey eliciting PCP narratives. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. A primary care study, with narratives from 159 PCPs in 23 European countries. PCPs' narratives on the question 'If you saw this patient with cancer presenting in the same way today, what would you do differently? The main themes identified were: thinking broadly; improvement in communication and clinical management; use of other available resources and 'I wouldn't do anything differently'. To achieve more timely cancer diagnosis, PCPs need to provide a long-term, holistic and active approach with effective communication, and to ensure shared decision-making, follow-up and continuing re-assessment of the patients' clinical conditions. Diagnosing cancer in primary care is challenging due to the low incidence of cancer in practice and the multiple confounding factors that are involved in the diagnostic process. The need to think broadly, make improvements in communication and clinical management, and use other available resources were the main themes from Primary Care Physicians' (PCPs') narratives about their learning experiences from missed or late cancer diagnoses. A long-term, holistic and active approach with effective communication, follow-up and continuing re-assessment of the patients' clinical conditions was another theme for making improvements. Some PCPs, on reflection, would not have done anything differently. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While primary care physicians (PCPs) play a key role in cancer detection, they can find cancer diagnosis challenging, and some patients have considerable delays between presentation and onward referral. Aim: To explore European PCPs' experiences and views on cases where they considered that they had been slow to think of, or act on, a possible cancer diagnosis. Design & setting: A multicentre European qualitative study, based on an online survey with open-ended questions, asking PCPs for their narratives about cases when they had missed a diagnosis of cancer. Method: Using maximum variation sampling, PCPs in 23 European countries were asked to describe what happened in a case where they were slow to think of a cancer diagnosis, and for their views on why it happened. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Results: A total of 158 PCPs completed the questionnaire. The main themes were as follows: patients' descriptions did not suggest cancer; distracting factors reduced PCPs' cancer suspicions; patients' hesitancy delayed the diagnosis; system factors not facilitating timely diagnosis; PCPs felt that they had acted wrongly; and problems with communicating adequately. Conclusion: The study identified six overarching themes that need to be addressed. Doing so should reduce morbidity and mortality in the small proportion of patients who have a significant, avoidable delay in their cancer diagnosis. The 'Swiss cheese' model of accident causation showed how the themes related to each other. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: How interactions during patient-provider encounters in Swedish primary care construct access to further care is rarely explored. This is especially relevant nowadays since Standardized Cancer Patient Pathways have been implemented as an organizational tool for standardizing the diagnostic process and increase equity in access. Most patients with symptoms indicating serious illness as cancer initially start their diagnostic trajectory in primary care. Furthermore, cancer symptoms are diverse and puts high demands on general practitioners (GPs). Hence, we aim to explore how presentation of bodily sensations were constructed and legitimized in primary care encounters within the context of Standardized Cancer Patient Pathways (CPPs).Methods: Participant observations of patient-provider encounters (n = 18, on 18 unique patients and 13 GPs) were carried out at primary healthcare centres in one county in northern Sweden. Participants were consecutively sampled and inclusion criteria were i) patients (≥18 years) seeking care for sensations/symptoms that could indicate cancer, or had worries about cancer, Swedish speaking and with no cognitive disabilities, and ii) GPs who met with these patients during the encounter. A constructivist approach of grounded theory method guided the data collection and was used as a method for analysis, and the COREQ-checklist for qualitative studies (Equator guidelines) were employed.Results: One conceptual model emerged from the analysis, consisting of one core category Negotiating bodily sensations to legitimize access, and four categories i) Justifying care-seeking, ii) Transmitting credibility, iii) Seeking and giving recognition, and iv) Balancing expectations with needs. We interpret the four categories as social processes that the patient and GP constructed interactively using different strategies to negotiate. Combined, these four processes illuminate how access was legitimized by negotiating bodily sensations.Conclusions: Patients and GPs seem to be mutually dependent on each other and both patients' expertise and GPs' medical expertise need to be reconciled during the encounter. The four social processes reported in this study acknowledge the challenging task which both patients and primary healthcare face. Namely, negotiating sensations signaling possible cancer and further identifying and matching them with the best pathway for investigations corresponding as well to patients' needs as to standardized routines as CPPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]