Implementing and Sustaining Early Cancer Diagnosis Initiatives in Canada: An Exploratory Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: The interval between suspected cancer and diagnosis for symptomatic patients is often fragmented, leading to diagnosis delays and increased patient stress. We conducted an exploratory qualitative study to explore barriers and facilitators to implementing and sustaining current initiatives across Canada that optimize early cancer diagnosis, with particular relevance for symptomatic patients. METHODS: The national study included a document review and key informant interviews with purposefully recruited participants. Data were analyzed by two researchers using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-two participants from eight provinces participated in key informant interviews and reported on 17 early cancer diagnosis initiatives. Most initiatives (88%) were in early phases of implementation. Two patient-facing and eight provider/organization barriers to implementation (e.g., lack of stakeholder buy-in and limited resources) and five facilitators for implementation and sustainability were identified. Opportunities to improve early cancer diagnosis initiatives included building relationships with stakeholders, co-creating initiatives, developing initiatives for Indigenous and underserved populations, optimizing efficiency and sustainability, and standardizing metrics to evaluate impact. CONCLUSION: Early cancer diagnosis initiatives in Canada are in early implementation phases. Lack of stakeholder buy-in and limited resources pose a challenge to sustainability. We present opportunities for funders and policymakers to optimize the use and potential impact of early cancer diagnosis initiatives.

Interventions to improve early cancer diagnosis of symptomatic individuals: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: To summarise the current evidence regarding interventions for accurate and timely cancer diagnosis among symptomatic individuals. DESIGN: A scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute's methodological framework for the conduct of scoping reviews and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost) and PsycINFO (Ovid) bibliographic databases, and websites of relevant organisations. Published and unpublished literature (grey literature) of any study type in the English language were searched for from January 2017 to January 2021. ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA: Study participants were individuals of any age presenting at clinics with symptoms indicative of cancer. Interventions included practice guidelines, care pathways or other initiatives focused on achieving predefined benchmarks or targets for wait times, streamlined or rapid cancer diagnostic services, multidisciplinary teams and patient navigation strategies. Outcomes included accuracy and timeliness of cancer diagnosis. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We summarised findings graphically and descriptively. RESULTS: From 21 298 retrieved citations, 88 unique published articles and 16 unique unpublished documents (on 18 study reports), met the eligibility for inclusion. About half of the published literature and 83% of the unpublished literature were from the UK. Most of the studies were on interventions in patients with lung cancer. Rapid referral pathways and technology for supporting and streamlining the cancer diagnosis process were the most studied interventions. Interventions were mostly complex and organisation-specific. Common themes among the studies that concluded intervention was effective were multidisciplinary collaboration and the use of a nurse navigator. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary cooperation and involvement of a nurse navigator may be unique features to consider when designing, delivering and evaluating interventions focused on improving accurate and timely cancer diagnosis among symptomatic individuals. Future research should examine the effectiveness of the interventions identified through this review.

How equitable is access to treatment for lung cancer patients? A population-based review of treatment practices in Ontario.

AIM: Guideline concordance is one of the metrics used by the Cancer Quality Council of Ontario and Cancer Care Ontario to assess the quality of cancer care and to drive quality improvement. MATERIALS & METHODS: The rates for lung cancer surgical resection and concordance with the Cancer Care Ontario postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) guideline were assessed by health region during two time periods (2010-2011 and 2012-2013) according to five equity measures (age, sex, neighborhood income, location of residence and size of immigrant population). RESULTS: Of the patients with stage I/II NSCLC, 52.2% to 63.0% underwent surgical resection in the province of Ontario, Canada; for patients with stage IIIA disease, the rate was 26.4%. The probability of a surgical resection decreased substantially with age; only 26.9% of those with potentially resectable (stage I-IIIA) disease over 80 years underwent surgery. The use of postoperative AC increased modestly over the time of the study but the rate of use varied widely by health region (34.6 to 84.6%). Patients in rural areas were as likely to receive AC as urban dwellers; however, older aged patients (≥65 years) and those from the lowest income neighborhoods were significantly less likely to receive AC. CONCLUSION: Surgical rates and the use of AC vary by health region in Ontario and by age and level of neighborhood income despite universal access in a publicly funded health care system. The reasons for this variance are unclear but warrant further study.Presented in part at the 15th World Conference on Lung Cancer, Sydney, Australia, 27-30 October 2013.

Raising the bar: using program evaluation for quality improvement.

The Cancer Quality Council of Ontario has undertaken 3 programmatic reviews, in partnership with Cancer Care Ontario, to evaluate an emerging or existing program and to provide future directions. The reviews are a quality improvement tool consisting of an assessment of the program's current state, a critical appraisal, and an environmental scan in advance of an event where attendees hear best practices from jurisdictions and participate in a discussion leading to a set of recommendations for the program.

Prediction of incomplete screening mammograms based on age and race.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the age-associated rate of incomplete mammograms requiring additional testing based on Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) score. METHODS: A retrospective, observational study design from a tertiary medical center was used to evaluate which explanatory variables significantly predicted whether a woman had an incomplete mammogram. An incomplete mammogram was defined as a BIRADS score of 0 (requiring further imaging), whereas a benign process was defined as a BIRADS score of 1 or 2. Explanatory variables included traditional clinical factors (age, race, and menopausal state). RESULTS: During the study period, 20,269 subjects were evaluated. The majority of the patients were white (n = 12,955; 64.6%) and had a BIRADS score consistent with a benign finding (n = 17,571; 86.6%). Premenopausal state (odds ratio [OR], 1.38; 95% CI, 1.27-1.50), white race (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.08-1.29), and younger age (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.27-1.50) significantly increased the odds a woman had an incomplete study. CONCLUSIONS: In this cross-sectional, single-institution analysis, premenopausal state and white race are associated with an increased rate for incomplete mammograms. Patients should be counseled appropriately before the initiation of screening.