'Low' faecal immunochemical test (FIT) colorectal cancer: a 4-year comparison of the Nottingham '4F' protocol with FIT10 in symptomatic patients.

AIM: The aim of this work was to evaluate colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes after 'low' (sub-threshold) faecal immunochemical test (FIT) results in symptomatic patients tested in primary care. METHOD: This work comprised a retrospective audit of 35 289 patients with FIT results who had consulted their general practitioner with lower gastrointestinal symptoms and had subsequent CRC diagnoses. The Rapid Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis pathway was introduced in November 2017 to allow incorporation of FIT into clinical practice. The local '4F' protocol combined FIT results with blood tests and digital rectal examination (DRE): FIT, full blood count, ferritin and finger [DRE]. The outcome used was detection rates of CRC, missed CRC and time to diagnosis in local 4F protocols for patients with a subthreshold faecal haemoglobin (fHb) result compared with thresholds of 10 and 20 µg Hb/g faeces. RESULTS: A single threshold of 10 µg Hb/g faeces identifies a population in whom the risk of CRC is 0.2%, but this would have missed 63 (10.5%) of 599 CRCs in this population. The Nottingham 4F protocol would have missed fewer CRCs [42 of 599 (7%)] despite using a threshold of 20 µg Hb/g faeces for patients with normal blood tests. Subthreshold FIT results in patients subsequently diagnosed with a palpable rectal tumour yielded the longest delays in diagnosis. CONCLUSION: A combination of FIT with blood results and DRE (the 4F protocol) reduced the risk of missed or delayed diagnosis. Further studies on the impact of such protocols on the diagnostic accuracy of FIT are expected. The value of adding blood tests to FIT may be restricted to specific parts of the fHb results spectrum.

The changing vaccine landscape: rates of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy in young adults during vaccine rollout.

AIMS: Development and rollout of vaccines offers the best opportunity for population protection against the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) virus. However, hesitancy towards the vaccines might impede successful uptake in the United Kingdom, particularly in young adults who demonstrate the highest rates of hesitancy. This prospective study explored COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in young adults and whether the reasons behind these attitudes changed during the initial stages of the United Kingdom's vaccine rollout. METHOD: Data on vaccination intention were collected from a British university student cohort at three time points: October 2020, February 2021, and March 2021. This online survey included items on intention to receive a vaccine and a free-text response for the reasons behind this intention. Cochran's Q tests examined changes in rates of hesitancy and acceptance over time and free-text responses were analysed thematically. RESULTS: At baseline, 893 students provided data, with 476 participants completing all three time points. Hesitancy declined over time, with 29.4% of participants expressing hesitancy at baseline, reducing to 9.1% at wave 2 and 5.9% at wave 3. The most commonly endorsed themes for those willing to accept a vaccine were self-protection against COVID-19 and pro-social reasons, including protecting the population or unspecific others, and ending the pandemic/returning to normal life. The most commonly endorsed hesitancy themes related to 'confidence' in the vaccines and potential personal risk, including insufficient testing/scientific evidence, concern about side effects, and long-term effects. These reasons remained the most commonly endorsed at both waves 2 and 3. CONCLUSIONS: While a decline in hesitancy was observed over time, the key reasons behind both vaccine acceptance and hesitancy remained consistent. Reasons behind hesitancy aligned with those of the general public, providing support for the use of generalist interventions. Pro-social reasons frequently underpinned vaccine acceptance, so cohort-specific interventions targeting those factors may be of benefit.

Differential pulse oximetry readings between ethnic groups and delayed transfer to intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: Pulse oximeters are widely used to monitor blood oxygen saturations, although concerns exist that they are less accurate in individuals with pigmented skin. AIMS: This study aimed to determine if patients with pigmented skin were more severely unwell at the period of transfer to intensive care units (ICUs) than individuals with White skin. METHODS: Using data from a large teaching hospital, measures of clinical severity at the time of transfer of patients with COVID-19 infection to ICUs were assessed, and how this varied by ethnic group. RESULTS: Data were available on 748 adults. Median pulse oximetry demonstrated similar oxygen saturations at the time of transfer to ICUs (Kruskal-Wallis test, P = 0.51), although median oxygen saturation measurements from arterial blood gases at this time demonstrated lower oxygen saturations in patients classified as Indian/Pakistani ethnicity (91.6%) and Black/Mixed ethnicity (93.0%), compared to those classified as a White ethnicity (94.4%, Kruskal-Wallis test, P = 0.005). There were significant differences in mean respiratory rates in these patients (P < 0.0001), ranging from 26 breaths/min in individuals with White ethnicity to 30 breaths/min for those classified as Indian/Pakistani ethnicity and 31 for those who were classified as Black/Mixed ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: These data are consistent with the hypothesis that differential measurement error for pulse oximeter readings negatively impact on the escalation of clinical care in individuals from other than White ethnic groups. This has implications for healthcare in Africa and South-East Asia and may contribute to differences in health outcomes across ethnic groups globally.

Understanding and addressing vaccine hesitancy in the context of COVID-19: development of a digital intervention.

OBJECTIVES: Severe Acute Respiratory Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified in late 2019, spreading to over 200 countries and resulting in almost two million deaths worldwide. The emergence of safe and effective vaccines provides a route out of the pandemic, with vaccination uptake of 75-90% needed to achieve population protection. Vaccine hesitancy is problematic for vaccine rollout; global reports suggest only 73% of the population may agree to being vaccinated. As a result, there is an urgent need to develop equitable and accessible interventions to address vaccine hesitancy at the population level. STUDY DESIGN: & Method: We report the development of a scalable digital intervention seeking to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and enhance uptake of COVID-19 vaccines in the United Kingdom. Guided by motivational interviewing (MI) principles, the intervention includes a series of therapeutic dialogues addressing 10 key concerns of vaccine-hesitant individuals. Development of the intervention occurred linearly across four stages. During stage 1, we identified common reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy through analysis of existing survey data, a rapid systematic literature review, and public engagement workshops. Stage 2 comprised qualitative interviews with medical, immunological, and public health experts. Rapid content and thematic analysis of the data provided evidence-based responses to common vaccine concerns. Stage 3 involved the development of therapeutic dialogues through workshops with psychological and digital behaviour change experts. Dialogues were developed to address concerns using MI principles, including embracing resistance and supporting self-efficacy. Finally, stage 4 involved digitisation of the dialogues and pilot testing with members of the public. DISCUSSION: The digital intervention provides an evidence-based approach to addressing vaccine hesitancy through MI principles. The dialogues are user-selected, allowing exploration of relevant issues associated with hesitancy in a non-judgmental context. The text-based content and digital format allow for rapid modification to changing information and scalability for wider dissemination.

The impact of COVID-19 on national screening programmes in England.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to review the trends in adult national screening programme performance in England before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and consider the future implications. STUDY DESIGN: This was a quantitative, longitudinal study. METHODS: Publicly available data on quarterly uptake of the five adult screening programmes in England were obtained from Public Health England. Trends from 2017 to 2021 were reviewed and discussed. RESULTS: From 2019 to 2020 Q4, there were substantial reductions in performance in four of the five national screening programmes that were not in keeping with recent trends. CONCLUSION: The reductions in screening performance coincide with the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic in England and may be explained by the temporary suspension of national screening programmes, and the inability or unwillingness of invitees to partake in screening once the programmes had been restored. Because of the delay in publication of the analysed data, further COVID-19 lockdowns in recent months make it probable that the current true screening performance figures are substantially lower than those presented in this article. The impact on screening programme performance is likely to be detrimental to patient outcomes, meaning remedial action is urgently required.

Quantitative FIT stratification is superior to NICE referral criteria NG12 in a high-risk colorectal cancer population.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for urgent investigation of colorectal cancer (CRC) are based on age and symptom-based criteria. This study aims to compare the diagnostic value of clinical features and faecal immunochemical test (FIT) results to identify those at a higher risk of CRC, thereby facilitating effective triage of patients. METHODS: We undertook a review of all patients referred for investigation of CRC at our centre between September 2016 and June 2018. Patients were identified using a prospectively recorded local database. We performed a logistic regression analysis of factors associated with a diagnosis of CRC. RESULTS: One-thousand-and-seven-hundred-eighty-four patients with FIT results were included in the study. Change in bowel habit (CIBH) was the most common referring clinical feature (38.3%). Patients diagnosed with CRC were significantly older than those without malignancy (74.0 years vs 68.9 years, p = 0.0007). Male patients were more likely to be diagnosed with CRC than females (6.5% vs 2.5%, Chi-squared 16.93, p < 0.0001). CRC was diagnosed in 3.5% (24/684) with CIBH compared to 8.1% (6/74) with both CIBH and iron deficiency anaemia. No individual or combination of referring clinical features was associated with an increased diagnosis of CRC (Chi-squared, 8.03, p = 0.155). Three patients with negative FIT results (< 4 µg Hb/g faeces) were diagnosed with CRC (3/1027, 0.3%). The highest proportion of cancers detected was in the ≥ 100 µg Hb/g faeces group (55/181, 30.4%). CONCLUSION: In a multivariate model, FIT outperforms age, sex and all symptoms prompting referral. FIT has greater stratification value than any referral symptoms. FIT does have value in patients with iron deficiency anaemia.

Evaluating an 'incident control' approach to non-communicable disease.

OBJECTIVES: This article evaluates the application of 'incident control' methodology usually applied in communicable disease control to an 'incident' of unexplained deaths, specifically to resolve a significant difference in 1-year survival after a lung cancer diagnosis observed between two Clinical Commissioning Groups and the England national average, 2011-14. The purpose of the evaluation was to assess whether a formalised incident control approach is feasible and effective in improving outcomes for non-communicable diseases. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive, qualitative, process evaluation. METHODS: There were two components to the evaluation: a document review against identified phases of a non-communicable disease incident control framework and a qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews with stakeholders who had been involved in implementation. RESULTS: The findings indicate feasibility of the incident control model, with some limitations. Identified strengths of the model included the articulation of a clear case and incident definition. The structure and stepped phased approach facilitated partner engagement, robust data analysis, action planning and communication strategies. Delays in data publication and the lack of comparable data across different non-communicable diseases present challenges in timely response and prioritisation of 'incidents'. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation indicates value in applying defined incident control methodology to management of non-communicable diseases, especially where there is identification of a potential outlier or a measurable variation, i.e. there is a definable 'incident' and 'case'.

Faecal immunochemical testing and blood tests for prioritization of urgent colorectal cancer referrals in symptomatic patients: a 2-year evaluation.

BACKGROUND: A novel pathway incorporating faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for rapid colorectal cancer diagnosis (RCCD) was introduced in 2017. This paper reports on the service evaluation after 2 years of pathway implementation. METHODS: The RCCD protocol was based on FIT, blood results and symptoms to stratify adult patients in primary care. Two-week-wait (2WW) investigation was indicated for patients with rectal bleeding, rectal mass and faecal haemoglobin (fHb) level of 10 µg Hb/g faeces or above or 4 µg Hb/g faeces or more in the presence of anaemia, low ferritin or thrombocytosis, in all other symptom groups. Patients with 100 µg Hb/g faeces or above had expedited investigation . A retrospective audit of colorectal cancer detected between 2017 and 2019 was conducted, fHb thresholds were reviewed and critically assessed for cancer diagnoses. RESULTS: In 2 years, 14788 FIT tests were dispatched with 13361 (90.4 per cent) completed returns. Overall, fHb was less than 4 µg Hb/g faeces in 9208 results (68.9 per cent), 4-9.9 µg Hb/g in 1583 (11.8 per cent), 10-99.9 µg Hb/g in 1850 (13.8 per cent) and 100 µg Hb/g faeces or above in 720 (5.4 per cent). During follow-up (median 10.4 months), 227 colorectal cancers were diagnosed. The cancer detection rate was 0.1 per cent in patients with fHb below 4 µg Hb/g faeces, 0.6 per cent in those with fHb 4-9.9 µg Hb/g faeces, 3.3 per cent for fHb 10-99.9 µg Hb/g faeces and 20.7 per cent for fHb 100 µg Hb/g faeces or above. The detection rate in the cohort with 10-19.9 µg Hb/g faeces was 1.4 per cent, below the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence threshold for urgent referral. The colorectal cancer rate in patients with fHb below 20 µg Hb/g faeces was less than 0.3 per cent. CONCLUSION: Use of FIT to "rule out" urgent referral from primary care misses a small number of cases. The threshold for referral may be adjusted with blood results to improve stratification .