Skip to main content

Cancer diagnosed by emergency admission in England

Patients diagnosed with cancer by the emergency route often have more advanced diseases and poorer outcomes. Rates of cancer diagnosed through unplanned admissions vary within and between countries, suggesting potential inconsistencies in the quality of care. To reduce diagnoses by this route and improve patient outcomes, high risk patient groups must be identified. In a paper published in BMC Health Services Research, Carmen Tsang and colleagues report the results of a cross-sectional observational study that determined the incidence of first-ever diagnoses of cancer by emergency (unplanned) admission and identified patient-level risk factors for these diagnoses in England.

Data for 74,763 randomly selected patients at 457 general practices between 1999 and 2008 were obtained from the General Practice Research Database (GPRD), including integrated Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data and Office for National Statistics (ONS) mortality data. The proportion of first-ever diagnoses by emergency admission out of all recorded first cancer diagnoses by any route was analysed by patient characteristics. Diagnosis by emergency admission was recorded in 13.9% of patients diagnosed with cancer for the first time. The incidence of first cases by the emergency route was 2.51 patients per 10,000 person years. In adjusted regression analyses, patients of older age, living in the most deprived areas or who had a total Charlson score of 1 compared to 0 were most at risk of diagnosis by emergency admission. Patients with more prior (all-cause) emergency admissions were less at risk of subsequent diagnosis by the emergency route.

Carmen Tsang and colleagues reported a much lower incidence of first-ever cancer diagnoses by emergency admission compared with previous studies; as well as a decline over time in the proportion of cancer cases diagnosed during an emergency admission. Identified high risk groups may benefit from interventions to reduce delayed diagnosis. Further studies should include screening and cancer staging data to improve understanding of delayed or untimely diagnosis and patient care pathways.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between primordial prevention and primary prevention?

Primordial prevention and primary prevention are both crucial strategies for promoting health, but they operate at different levels. Primordial prevention aims to address the root causes of health problems and improve the wider determinants of health. It focuses on preventing the emergence of risk factors in the first place by tackling the underlying social, economic, and environmental determinants of health. This involves broad, population-wide interventions such as: Policies that promote healthy food choices: Think about initiatives like taxing sugary drinks to discourage unhealthy consumption, or providing subsidies for fruits and vegetables to make them more accessible. Urban planning that prioritises well-being: This could include creating walkable neighborhoods with safe cycling routes, ensuring access to green spaces for recreation and relaxation, and designing communities that foster social connections. Social programs that address inequality: Initiatives aimed at reducing pov...
Post a Comment
Read more

UK Covid-19 Inquiry - The Importance of a Strong Primary Healthcare System

In my witness statement for Module 10 of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry, I discuss the pandemic's impact through from the perspectives of  primary care and public health, drawing on my extensive experience as a senior academic at Imperial College London and as a practising GP and NHS Public Health Specialist.  I emphasise that the pandemic disproportionately affected people who were clinically vulnerable, the disabled, ethnic minority communities and those living in deprived areas. The pandemic highlighted how structural inequalities, multigenerational housing, and employment in high-risk frontline roles exacerbated health disparities.  My statement also critiques the weakening of public health infrastructure - particularly for the control of infectious diseases - and the lack of integrated health data systems to identify at-risk groups such as the clinically vulnerable. I also advocated for a more robust preventive healthcare model that prioritises community-based primary care ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Protecting Young People from Meningococcal B Disease: The NHS Targeted Vaccination Programme

Meningococcal group B (MenB) infections are rare but can have devastating consequences. The decision to offer a targeted two-dose vaccination programme to Year 13 students and young people entering university or residential further education reflects concerns about recent outbreaks of meningococcal disease and the higher risk of transmission when large numbers of young adults mix closely for the first time in shared accommodation. The MenB vaccine has a well-established safety record, and evidence from the UK infant immunisation programme has shown substantial reductions in disease among vaccinated children. A targeted programme for those entering higher-risk settings is therefore a reasonable precautionary measure while further evidence is gathered on whether the recent increase in clusters represents a temporary fluctuation in disease patterns or a more sustained change in the epidemiology of MenB infection. The success of the programme will depend on achieving high uptake and ensuri...
Post a Comment
Read more