Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Sep;68(674):e594-e603.
doi: 10.3399/bjgp18X698561. Epub 2018 Aug 13.

Direct access cancer testing in primary care: a systematic review of use and clinical outcomes

Claire Friedemann Smith  1 , Alice C Tompson  1 , Nicholas Jones  1 , Josh Brewin  1 , Elizabeth A Spencer  1 , Clare R Bankhead  1 , Fd Richard Hobbs  1 , Brian D Nicholson  1
Affiliations

Direct access cancer testing in primary care: a systematic review of use and clinical outcomes

Claire Friedemann Smith et al. Br J Gen Pract. 2018 Sep.

Abstract

Background: Direct access (DA) testing allows GPs to refer patients for investigation without consulting a specialist. The aim is to reduce waiting time for investigations and unnecessary appointments, enabling treatment to begin without delay.

Aim: To establish the proportion of patients diagnosed with cancer and other diseases through DA testing, time to diagnosis, and suitability of DA investigations.

Design and setting: Systematic review assessing the effectiveness of GP DA testing in adults.

Method: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched. Where possible, study data were pooled and analysed quantitatively. Where this was not possible, the data are presented narratively.

Results: The authors identified 60 papers that met pre-specified inclusion criteria. Most studies were carried out in the UK and were judged to be of poor quality. The authors found no significant difference in the pooled cancer conversion rate between GP DA referrals and patients who first consulted a specialist for any test, except gastroscopy. There were also no significant differences in the proportions of patients receiving any non-cancer diagnosis. Referrals for testing were deemed appropriate in 66.4% of those coming from GPs, and in 80.9% of those from consultants; this difference was not significant. The time from referral to testing was significantly shorter for patients referred for DA tests. Patient and GP satisfaction with DA testing was consistently high.

Conclusion: GP DA testing performs as well as, and on some measures better than, consultant triaged testing on measures of disease detection, appropriateness of referrals, interval from referral to testing, and patient and GP satisfaction.

Keywords: cancer; diagnosis; diagnostic tests; health services accessibility/standards; primary care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
PRISMA diagram: papers included in the review.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Hamilton W. Five misconceptions in cancer diagnosis. Br J Gen Pract. 2009. . - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ott JJ, Ullrich A, Miller AB. The importance of early symptom recognition in the context of early detection and cancer survival. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(16):2743–2748. - PubMed
    1. Richards MA. The size of the prize for earlier diagnosis of cancer in England. Br J Cancer. 2009;101(Suppl 2):S125–S129. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rubin G, Lyratzopoulos G, Abel G, et al. Cancer detection in primary care. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(8):e325–e326. - PubMed
    1. Olesen F, Hansen RP, Vedsted P. Delay in diagnosis: the experience in Denmark. Br J Cancer. 2009;101(Suppl 2):S5–S8. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources