Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
Trials ; 19(1): 419, 2018 Aug 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30075741

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The ELCID (Early Lung Cancer Investigation and Diagnosis) trial was a feasibility randomised controlled trial examining the effect on lung cancer diagnosis of lowering the threshold for referral for urgent chest x-ray for smokers and recent ex-smokers, aged over 60 years with new chest symptoms. The qualitative component aimed to explore the feasibility of individually randomising patients to an urgent chest x-ray or not and to investigate any barriers to patient recruitment and participation. We integrated this within the feasibility trial to inform the design of any future definitive trial, particularly in view of the lack of research exploring symptomatic patients' experiences of participating in diagnostic trials for possible/suspected lung cancer. Although previous studies contributed valuable information concerning screening for lung cancer and patient participation in trials, this paper is the first to explore issues relating to this specific patient group. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with 21 patients, comprising 9 who had been randomised to receive an immediate chest x-ray, 10 who were randomised to receive the standard treatment according to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines, and 2 who chose not to participate in the trial. Interviews were analysed using a framework approach. RESULTS: The findings of this analysis showed that altruism, personal benefit and the reassurance of not having lung cancer were important factors in patient participation. However, patients largely believed that being in the intervention arm was more beneficial, highlighting a lack of understanding of clinical equipoise. Disincentives to participation in the trial included the stigmatisation of patients who smoked (given the inclusion criteria). Although the majority of patients reported that they were happy with the trial design, there was evidence of poor understanding. Last, for several patients, placing trust in health professionals was preferred to understanding the trial processes. CONCLUSIONS: The integration of a qualitative study focusing on participant experience as a secondary outcome of a feasibility trial enabled exploration of patient response to participation and recruitment. The study demonstrated that although it is feasible to recruit patients to the ELCID trial, more work needs to be done to ensure an understanding of study principles and also of smoking stigmatisation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01344005 . Registered on 27 April 2011.


Assuntos
Compreensão , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico por imagem , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/psicologia , Radiografia Torácica , Sujeitos da Pesquisa/psicologia , Altruísmo , Estudos de Viabilidade , Feminino , Humanos , Entrevistas como Assunto , Neoplasias Pulmonares/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/psicologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Motivação , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Fatores de Risco , Fumantes/psicologia , Fumar/efeitos adversos , Fumar/epidemiologia , Fumar/psicologia , Estereotipagem , País de Gales/epidemiologia
2.
Br J Cancer ; 116(3): 293-302, 2017 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28072761

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Achieving earlier stage diagnosis is one option for improving lung cancer outcomes in the United Kingdom. Patients with lung cancer typically present with symptoms to general practitioners several times before referral or investigation. METHODS: We undertook a mixed methods feasibility individually randomised controlled trial (the ELCID trial) to assess the feasibility and inform the design of a definitive, fully powered, UK-wide, Phase III trial of lowering the threshold for urgent investigation of suspected lung cancer. Patients over 60, with a smoking history, presenting with new chest symptoms to primary care, were eligible to be randomised to intervention (urgent chest X-ray) or usual care. RESULTS: The trial design and materials were acceptable to GPs and patients. We randomised 255 patients from 22 practices, although the proportion of eligible patients who participated was lower than expected. Survey responses (89%), and the fidelity of the intervention (82% patients X-rayed within 3 weeks) were good. There was slightly higher anxiety and depression in the control arm in participants aged >75. Three patients (1.2%) were diagnosed with lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated the feasibility of individually randomising patients at higher risk of lung cancer, to a trial offering urgent investigation or usual care.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Atenção Primária à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Radiografia Torácica , Idoso , Estudos de Viabilidade , Feminino , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de Tempo , Reino Unido/epidemiologia , Raios X
3.
Trials ; 14: 405, 2013 Nov 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24279296

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In order to improve lung cancer survival in the UK, a greater proportion of resectable cancers must be diagnosed. It is likely that resectability rates would be increased by more timely diagnosis. Aside from screening, the only way of achieving this is to reduce the time to diagnosis in symptomatic cancers. Currently, lung cancers are mainly diagnosed by general practitioners (GPs) using the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines for urgent referral for chest X-ray, which recommend urgent imaging or referral for patients who have one of a number of chest symptoms for more than 3 weeks. We are proposing to expand this recommendation to include one of a number of chest symptoms of any duration in higher-risk patients. METHODS/DESIGN: We intend to conduct a trial of imaging in these higher-risk patients and compare it with NICE guidelines to see if imaging improves stage at diagnosis and resection rates. This trial would have to be large (and consequently resource-intensive) because most of these patients will not have lung cancer, making optimal design crucial. We are therefore conducting a pilot trial that will ascertain the feasibility of running a full trial and provide key information that will be required in order to design the full trial. DISCUSSION: This trial will assess the feasibility and inform the design of a large, UK-wide, clinical trial of a change to the NICE guidelines for urgent referral for chest X-ray for suspected lung cancer. It utilizes a combination of workshop, health economic, quality of life, qualitative, and quantitative methods in order to fully assess feasibility. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01344005.


Assuntos
Protocolos Clínicos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico por imagem , Radiografia Torácica , Coleta de Dados , Estudos de Viabilidade , Humanos , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Projetos de Pesquisa , Risco , Tamanho da Amostra
4.
Nurs Times ; 107(13): 21-3, 2011.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21678720

RESUMO

This article explains how to achieve accreditation for a practice development unit, focusing on the demand for public-patient representation on its steering group. It maps the unit's development and how public-patient input has evolved, with decisions being made jointly by health professionals and public representatives about the selection, management and progression of current and future practice development.


Assuntos
Centros Médicos Acadêmicos/organização & administração , Institutos de Cardiologia/organização & administração , Medicina Estatal/organização & administração , Voluntários/organização & administração , Acreditação/organização & administração , Humanos , Reino Unido , Recursos Humanos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...