Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
      • Programme
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Blog
    • eLetters
    • Feedback
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
Advertisement
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Blog
    • eLetters
    • Feedback
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
Research

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

Claire Friedemann Smith, Alice C Tompson, Nicholas Jones, Josh Brewin, Elizabeth A Spencer, Clare R Bankhead, FD Richard Hobbs and Brian D Nicholson
British Journal of General Practice 2018; 68 (674): e594-e603. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp18X698561
Claire Friedemann Smith
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alice C Tompson
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nicholas Jones
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Josh Brewin
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Elizabeth A Spencer
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Clare R Bankhead
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
FD Richard Hobbs
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Brian D Nicholson
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

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.

  • cancer
  • diagnosis
  • diagnostic tests
  • health services accessibility/standards
  • primary care
  • Received February 21, 2018.
  • Revision requested March 19, 2018.
  • Accepted April 4, 2018.
  • © British Journal of General Practice 2018
View Full Text

  RCGP login

Members, please Login at RCGP to access the journal online.

  Subscriber login

Enter your BJGP login information below.

Log in using your username and password

Enter your British Journal of General Practice username.
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
Forgot your user name or password?

Log in through your institution

You may be able to gain access using your login credentials for your institution. Contact your library if you do not have a username and password.
If your organization uses OpenAthens, you can log in using your OpenAthens username and password. To check if your institution is supported, please see this list. Contact your library for more details.

Pay Per Article - You may access this article (from the computer you are currently using) for 1 day for US$35.00

Regain Access - You can regain access to a recent Pay per Article purchase if your access period has not yet expired.

  Subscribe

Subscribe to the Journal - Subscribe to the print and/or online journal.

Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 68 (674)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 68, Issue 674
September 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Download PowerPoint
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Direct access cancer testing in primary care: a systematic review of use and clinical outcomes
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
Citation Tools
Direct access cancer testing in primary care: a systematic review of use and clinical outcomes
Claire Friedemann Smith, Alice C Tompson, Nicholas Jones, Josh Brewin, Elizabeth A Spencer, Clare R Bankhead, FD Richard Hobbs, Brian D Nicholson
British Journal of General Practice 2018; 68 (674): e594-e603. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp18X698561

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Direct access cancer testing in primary care: a systematic review of use and clinical outcomes
Claire Friedemann Smith, Alice C Tompson, Nicholas Jones, Josh Brewin, Elizabeth A Spencer, Clare R Bankhead, FD Richard Hobbs, Brian D Nicholson
British Journal of General Practice 2018; 68 (674): e594-e603. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp18X698561
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • METHOD
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Notes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • cancer
  • diagnosis
  • diagnostic tests
  • health services accessibility/standards
  • primary care

More in this TOC Section

  • Cognitive behavioural treatment for insomnia in primary care: a systematic review of sleep outcomes
  • Measuring adherence to therapy in apparent treatment-resistant hypertension: a feasibility study in Irish primary care
  • Provision and accessibility of primary healthcare services for people who are homeless: a qualitative study of patient perspectives in the UK
Show more Research

Related Articles

Cited By...

Advertisement

 

Present your research at the BJGP Research Conference, 12 March 2020

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers
  • RCGP e-Portfolio

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Blog
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44(0) 20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2019 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242