Mette Bach Larsen

Secondary care intervals before and after the introduction of urgent referral guidelines for suspected cancer in Denmark: a comparative before-after study

BackgroundUrgent referral for suspected cancer was implemented in Denmark on 1 April 2008 to reduce the secondary care interval (i.e. the time interval from the general practitioner’s first referral of a patient to secondary health care until treatment is initiated). However, knowledge about the association between the secondary care interval and urgent referral remains scarce. The aim of this study was to analyse how the secondary care interval changed after the introduction of urgent referral.MethodsThis was a retrospective population-based study of 6,518 incident cancer patients based on questionnaire data from the patients’ GPs. Analyses were stratified with patients discharged from Vejle Hospital in one stratum and patients from other hospitals in another because Vejle Hospital initiated urgent referrals several years prior to the national implementation. Further, analyses were stratified according to symptom presentation and whether or not the GP referred the patient on suspicion of cancer. Symptom presentation was defined as with or without alarm symptoms based on GP interpretation of early symptoms.ResultsThe median secondary care interval decreased after the introduction of urgent referral. Patients discharged from Vejle Hospital tended to have shorter secondary care intervals than patients discharged from other hospitals. The strongest effect was seen in patients with alarm symptoms and those who were referred by their GP on suspicion of cancer. Breast cancer patients from Vejle Hospital experienced an even shorter secondary care interval after the national introduction of urgent referrals.ConclusionUrgent referral had a positive effect on the secondary care interval, and Vejle Hospital remarkably managed to shorten the intervals even further. This finding indicates that the shorter secondary care intervals not only result from the urgent referral guidelines, but also involve other factors.

Existing data sources for clinical epidemiology: Danish Cancer in Primary Care cohort

Background In this paper, we describe the settings, content, and possibilities of the Danish Cancer in Primary Care (CaP) cohort as well as some of the key findings so far. Further, we describe the future potential of the cohort as an international resource for epidemiological and health services research studies. Methods The CaP cohort comprises information from three Danish subcohorts set up in 2004–2005, 2007–2008, and 2010 on newly diagnosed cancer patients aged 18 years or older. General practitioner (GP)-reported and patient-reported data from six questionnaires generated information on causes and consequences of delayed diagnosis of cancer, and these data were supplemented with complete information on, eg, death, migration, health care utilization, medication use, and socioeconomic data from Denmark’s comprehensive health and administrative registers. The cohort is followed up in terms of emigration, death, hospitalization, medication, and socioeconomics, and data are updated regularly. Results In total, we identified 22,169 verified incident cancer cases. Completed GP questionnaires were returned for 17,566 (79%) of the verified cases, and patient questionnaires were completed by 8,937 (40%) respondents. Patients with participating GPs did not differ from patients with nonparticipating GPs in regard to one-year survival, comorbidity, or educational level. However, compared with nonparticipating GPs, patients listed with participating GPs were more likely to be women, younger, to have a higher disposable income, to have more regional or distant spread of tumors, were also more likely to have breast cancer, and were less likely to have prostate cancer. Responding patients were more likely to be women, aged 45–74 years, and diagnosed with breast cancer or malignant melanoma, and have higher one-year survival rates, more localized tumors, higher educational background, and higher disposable income. Conclusion The cohort is an international resource for epidemiological and health service research, and data are accessible for well defined and approved collaborative studies.

Agreement between patient-reported and doctor-reported patient intervals and date of first symptom presentation in cancer diagnosis - A population-based questionnaire study

BACKGROUND The concept of delay in cancer diagnosis has been a scientific issue for decades, and there is still no standardised and validated way to measure the time intervals. One of the intervals that are difficult to measure is the patient interval (i.e. the period from the patients first symptom until the first presentation to the health care system) because dates of symptom onset and first presentation are difficult to establish precisely. Further, since patients may have another experience of the diagnostic pathway than e.g. the general practitioner (GP), a reasonable question remains whether patients and GPs agree on these important milestones. The objective of this study was to analyse the agreement between patient-reported and GP-reported patient intervals and date of first presentation of cancer-related symptom(s) to the GP. METHODS On the basis of a cohort study, we included incident cancer patients from the former Aarhus County from 1 September, 2004 to 31 August, 2005. Both patients and GPs reported the length of the patient interval and the date of the first presentation to the GP with a cancer-related symptom measured by self-administered questionnaires. Agreement was measured using agreement-survival plots and Lins concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). RESULTS There was full agreement between GP- and patient-reported patient intervals in 21.0% of all the cancer cases. In 50.1% of cases, patients and GPs agreed about the patient interval within a margin of one month. There was full agreement between GP- and patient-reported date of first presentation in 37.5% of the cancer cases and within one week in 52.0% of all the cancer cases. Overall, the agreement on the length of the patient interval was poor (CCC=0.513), but better for patients presenting with alarm symptoms. The agreement was moderate between GP- and patient-reported dates of first presentation (CCC=0.924). CONCLUSION We found that GPs systematically reported a longer patient interval than patients did. We found moderate agreement on reported date of first presentation of symptoms to the GP, meaning that the disagreement in reported patient interval is related to date of first symptom rather than date of first presentation to the GP.

Erratum to: Impact of opportunistic testing in a systematic cervical cancer screening program: a nationwide registry study

Background Systematic screening for precancerous cervical lesions has resulted in decreased incidence and mortality of cervical cancer. However, even in systematic screening programs, many women are still tested opportunistically. This study aimed to determine the spread of opportunistic testing in a systematic cervical cancer screening program, the impact of opportunistic testing in terms of detecting cytological abnormalities and examine the associations between sociodemography and opportunistic testing.

Sociodemographic characteristics of nonparticipants in the Danish colorectal cancer screening program: a nationwide cross-sectional study

Introduction Fecal occult blood tests are recommended for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in Europe. Recently, the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) has come into use. Sociodemographic differences between participants and nonparticipants may be less pronounced when using FIT as there are no preceding dietary restrictions and only one specimen is required. The aim of this study was to examine the associations between sociodemographic characteristics and nonparticipation for both genders, with special emphasis on those who actively unsubscribe from the program. Methods The study was a national, register-based, cross-sectional study among men and women randomized to be invited to participate in the prevalence round of the Danish CRC screening program between March 1 and December 31, 2014. Prevalence ratios (PRs) were used to quantify the association between sociodemographic characteristics and nonparticipation (including active nonparticipation). PRs were assessed using Poisson regression with robust error variance. Results The likelihood of being a nonparticipant was highest in the younger part of the population; however, for women, the association across age groups was U-shaped. Female immigrants were more likely to be nonparticipants. Living alone, being on social welfare, and having lower income were factors that were associated with nonparticipation among both men and women. For both men and women, there was a U-shaped association between education and nonparticipation. For both men and women, the likelihood of active nonparticipation rose with age; it was lowest among non-western immigrants and highest among social welfare recipients. Conclusion Social inequality in screening uptake was evident among both men and women in the Danish CRC screening program, even though the program is free of charge and the screening kit is based on FIT and mailed directly to the individuals. Interventions are needed to bridge this gap if CRC screening is to avoid aggravating existing inequalities in CRC-related morbidity and mortality.

Chlamydia trachomatis infection in young adults — association with concurrent partnerships and short gap length between partners

Abstract Background: Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) continue to be highly prevalent in young people. New understanding of sexual risk behaviour is essential for future preventive initiatives. Studies based on self-reported STI history indicate that gap length between sexual partnerships is an important determinant in STI transmission, but little is known about the impact of concurrent partnerships and short gap length. This study aimed to examine the significance of concurrent partnerships and short gap length between serially monogamous partnerships in Chlamydia trachomatis-infected individuals compared to the general population. Methods: A Danish cross-sectional study was conducted among individuals aged 15–29 years with a verified C. trachomatis infection and a sample of the background population. Participants answered a web-based questionnaire on sexual behaviour. Associations were identified in multivariate analyses. Results: In total, 36% of the included young adults reported that they had two or more partners within the last year. Concurrent partnerships were frequent (46%), and the gap length between serially monogamous partnerships tended to be short (median gap length, 64 days, interquartile interval (IQI) = 31, 122). A strong association was found between concurrent partnerships (odds ratio (OR) = 12.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 7.7–20.4), short gap length between serially monogamous partnerships (OR = 10.0, 95% CI = 5.7–17.4) and having a verified C. trachomatis infection. Conclusions: C. trachomatis infection was strongly associated with concurrent partnerships or short gap length between serially monogamous partnerships. These findings have considerable implications for public health policy. Both types of risk factors should be considered in future preventive interventions aiming to reduce the spread of C. trachomatis infections.

Developing a self-administered decision aid for fecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening tailored to citizens with lower educational attainment: qualitative study

Background Citizens with lower educational attainments (EA) take up colorectal cancer screening to a lesser degree, and more seldom read and understand conventional screening information than citizens with average EAs. The information needs of citizens with lower EA are diverse, however, with preferences ranging from wanting clear recommendations to seeking detailed information about screening. Decision aids have been developed to support citizens with lower EA in making informed decisions about colorectal cancer screening participation, but none embrace diverse information needs. Objective The aim of this study was to develop a self-administered decision aid for participation in fecal immunochemical test–based colorectal cancer screening. The decision aid should be tailored to citizens with lower EA and should embrace diverse information needs. Methods The Web-based decision aid was developed according to an international development framework, with specific steps for designing, alpha testing, peer reviewing, and beta testing the decision aid. In the design phase, a prototype of the decision aid was developed based on previous studies about the information needs of lower EA citizens and the International Patient Decision Aid Standards guidelines. Alpha testing was conducted using focus group interviews and email correspondence. Peer review was conducted using email correspondence. Both tests included both lower EA citizens and health care professionals. The beta testing was conducted using telephone interviews with citizens with lower EA. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results The developed decision aid presented information in steps, allowing citizens to read as much or as little as wanted. Values clarification questions were included after each section of information, and answers were summarized in a “choice-indicator” on the last page, guiding the citizens toward a decision about screening participation. Statistics were presented in both natural frequencies, absolute risk formats and graphically. The citizens easily and intuitively navigated around the final version of the decision aid and stated that they felt encouraged to think about the benefits and harms of colorectal cancer screening without being overloaded with information. They found the decision aid easy to understand and the text of suitable length. The health care professionals agreed with the citizens on most parts; however, concerns were raised about the length and readability of the text. Conclusions We have developed a self-administered decision aid presenting information in steps. We involved both citizens and health care professionals to target the decision aid for citizens with lower EA. This decision aid represents a new way of communicating detailed information and may be able to enhance informed choices about colorectal cancer screening participation among citizens with lower EA.

Waiting for diagnostic colonoscopy: a qualitative exploration of screening participants’ experiences in a FIT-based colorectal cancer screening program

Background Participants in population-based screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) may experience increased anxiety immediately after a positive screening test, but research in this area is limited. The objective of this study was to explore how screening participants experience a positive test result and cope with the pre-diagnostic waiting period in a CRC screening program. Materials and methods Screening participants with a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) result were identified in the Danish national CRC program before they attended diagnostic colonoscopy. Sixteen screening participants were selected for an interview in their own homes, using a semi-structured interview guide. Transcribed data were analyzed thematically. Results The most prominent themes were symptom appraisal and communication strategies. Most participants attributed the positive FIT result showing blood in the stool to pre-existing non-malignant conditions but a few were very worried about the FIT result and the outcome of the colonoscopy. Communication strategies included discussions with family or friends about the positive FIT result and the upcoming colonoscopy, or containing information until the colonoscopy had provided the definitive diagnostic result. There was no apparent need for communication with health care professionals during the pre-diagnostic waiting period. Conclusion The pre-diagnostic waiting period between positive FIT result and colonoscopy in a population-based screening program may cause worry for some participants, potentially to require support, but most people consider it unconcerning. Screening providers should communicate to all screening participants in written form that negative emotional responses may occur after a positive screening result. This is particularly important in screening programs using self-sample kits without the presence of a health care professional to reassure the few participants who may experience significant anxiety.

Effectiveness of self-administered decision aids for people invited to participate in colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review protocol

REVIEW QUESTION/OBJECTIVE The objective is to assess the effectiveness of self-administered decision aids for people invited to participate in colorectal cancer screening. We will evaluate effects on informed choice, decisional conflict, knowledge, and participation in colorectal cancer screening.

Satisfaction, discomfort, obligations, and concerns in population-based breast cancer screening: cross-sectional study in a Danish population

BackgroundPotential barriers to breast cancer screening adherence include patient satisfaction, as well as pain, feeling obliged to participate, and other concerns that might compromise the level of satisfaction.The present study aimed to assess the overall satisfaction of Danish citizens with their breast cancer screening experiences, as well as their level of discomfort, concerns, and feelings of obligation to participate. Furthermore, we analyzed the associations between overall satisfaction and the remaining outcomes.MethodsQuestionnaires were mailed to 3000 women in the Central Denmark Region who received screening examination results in the fall of 2013. The questionnaire assessed satisfaction (overall, telephone hot-line, and web-based self-service), discomfort (pain and boundaries of modesty), concerns (at invitation, while waiting for results, and after receiving results), and feelings of obligation to participate. Background information was retrieved from Statistics Denmark.Pearson’s chi-square test was used to test differences in outcomes and demographic characteristic distributions between respondents and non-respondents and highly satisfied vs. less satisfied participants. Prevalence ratios (PR) with 95% CI were assessed using Poisson regression with robust variance, to estimate associations between satisfaction and the remaining outcomes.ResultsAmong the participants, 70.3% and 29.4%, respectively, reported really good and good impressions of the screening program. Lower satisfaction was associated with feeling pain (prevalence ratio (PR), 0.82), feeling that modesty boundaries were transgressed (PR, 0.79), experiencing screening-induced concerns (PR, 0.84), and feeling obliged to participate (PR, 0.96). Of the participants, 36.2% and 12.9%, respectively, felt very much and moderately obliged to participate. A total of 72.6% reported no screening-induced concerns, including 73.3% of those with negative screening results and 38.1% of those with positive screening results.ConclusionsOverall satisfaction with breast cancer screening was very high, but discomfort, feelings of obligation, and concerns were associated with lower satisfaction levels. A continuing focus on high service in breast cancer screening is important for achieving the highest benefit from the program. This includes initiatives to employ the least painful techniques, to respect the patients’ modesty as much as possible, and to deliver fast screening results and thus minimize concerns among women awaiting results.