Primary Care System Factors and Clinical Decision-making in Patients that Could Have Lung Cancer: a Vignette Study in Five Balkan Region Countries.

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death, with wide variations in national survival rates. This study compares primary care system factors and primary care practitioners' (PCPs') clinical decision-making for a vignette of a patient that could have lung cancer in five Balkan region countries (Slovenia, Croatia, Bulgaria, Greece, Romania). METHODS: PCPs participated in an online questionnaire that asked for demographic data, practice characteristics, and information on health system factors. Participants were also asked to make clinical decisions in a vignette of a patient with possible lung cancer. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 475 PCPs. There were significant national differences in PCPs' direct access to investigations, particularly to advanced imaging. PCPs from Bulgaria, Greece, and Romania were more likely to organise relevant investigations. The highest specialist referral rates were in Bulgaria and Romania. PCPs in Bulgaria were less likely to have access to clinical guidelines, and PCPs from Slovenia and Croatia were more likely to have access to a cancer fast-track specialist appointment system. The PCPs' country had a significant effect on their likelihood of investigating or referring the patient. CONCLUSIONS: There are large differences between Balkan region countries in PCPs' levels of direct access to investigations. When faced with a vignette of a patient with the possibility of having lung cancer, their investigation and referral rates vary considerably. To reduce diagnostic delay in lung cancer, direct PCP access to advanced imaging, availability of relevant clinical guidelines, and fast-track referral systems are needed.

Primary care practitioners' diagnostic action when the patient may have cancer: an exploratory vignette study in 20 European countries.

OBJECTIVES: Cancer survival rates vary widely between European countries, with differences in timeliness of diagnosis thought to be one key reason. There is little evidence on the way in which different healthcare systems influence primary care practitioners' (PCPs) referral decisions in patients who could have cancer.This study aimed to explore PCPs' diagnostic actions (whether or not they perform a key diagnostic test and/or refer to a specialist) in patients with symptoms that could be due to cancer and how they vary across European countries. DESIGN: A primary care survey. PCPs were given vignettes describing patients with symptoms that could indicate cancer and asked how they would manage these patients. The likelihood of taking immediate diagnostic action (a diagnostic test and/or referral) in the different participating countries was analysed. Comparisons between the likelihood of taking immediate diagnostic action and physician characteristics were calculated. SETTING: Centres in 20 European countries with widely varying cancer survival rates. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2086 PCPs answered the survey question, with a median of 72 PCPs per country. RESULTS: PCPs' likelihood of immediate diagnostic action at the first consultation varied from 50% to 82% between countries. PCPs who were more experienced were more likely to take immediate diagnostic action than their peers. CONCLUSION: When given vignettes of patients with a low but significant possibility of cancer, more than half of PCPs across Europe would take diagnostic action, most often by ordering diagnostic tests. However, there are substantial between-country variations.

(Dis)organization of Palliative Care as a Potential Quality-of-Life Issue in the Senior Population--Croatian Experiences.

This paper analyses the current situation in the Croatian health-care system, with special emphasis on the (dis)organization of palliative care within the public health, more precisely gerontology context. Namely, population world-wide is getting older, that is both a statistical and an everyday-medical fact. Today we consider citizens after the age of 65 as the elderly, with a tendency to move the age-limit to 75 years. Croatia on the matter swiftly follows global trends, while literature points to the fact that an increase in the elderly population dictates the need for an organized system of palliative care and hospice building. Although we cannot ignore the fact that children can become palliative care patients, we can conclude that these are predominantly elderly patients. In fact, approximately half of patients--users of palliative care--have some type of oncological diagnosis; a significant number of patients suffer from dementia, stroke, or heart failure. As for the Primorsko-goranska county and the City of Rijeka, they show similar trend, as can be illustrated with data from the 2011 census, when the share of citizens over 65 years in the population of the Primorsko-goranska county reached 18.91%, and in the population of the City of Rijeka 19.74%. Thus, one of the main quality-of-life issues in the Croatian senior population is the (dis)function of the palliative medicine/care system. Practice, namely, shows that there has still been no implementation. In particular, palliative medicine is not yet recognized as a speciality or sub-speciality, standards and norms for this activity are not set, palliative care is still not included in the system of obligatory health insurance, and as far as the national strategy of health policy for the area of palliative care, Croatian Government at its meeting held on 27th December 2013 finally adopted the "Strategic Plan for Palliative Care of the Republic of Croatia for the period from 2014 to 2016". Exactly because we are a decade behind European standards (Recommendation Rec (2003) 24 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the organization of palliative care), it is more than legitimate to place this subject at the centre of the current Croatian gerontology interest.