Premium
Direct access colonoscopy: impact of intervention on time to colorectal cancer diagnosis and treatment in North West Tasmania
Author(s) -
Allen Penny,
Gately Lucy,
Banks Patricia,
Lee Adrian A. Y. S.,
Hamilton Garry,
Tan Lavinia,
Sim Sheryl
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
internal medicine journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.596
H-Index - 70
eISSN - 1445-5994
pISSN - 1444-0903
DOI - 10.1111/imj.13514
Subject(s) - medicine , colonoscopy , referral , colorectal cancer , intervention (counseling) , emergency department , cancer , general surgery , emergency medicine , family medicine , nursing
Background Direct access colonoscopy ( DAC ) allows general practitioners to refer directly for colonoscopy, without specialist review. Research suggests DAC reduces times to diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer. However, there is no information about outcomes of DAC in Australia. Aim To determine if DAC in North West Tasmania expedited colorectal diagnosis and treatment. Methods Pre‐post intervention study evaluating time from referral to diagnosis and definitive treatment. Patient demographic characteristics, referral, colonoscopy and treatment information was retrieved from hospital records. Timelines were investigated in standard referrals ( SR ), emergency department/inpatient referrals and DAC using survival analysis. Results Two hundred and six colorectal cancer cases were identified (117 SR , 26 DAC , 48 emergency department/inpatient and 15 unknown pathways). Median time to colonoscopy/diagnosis ( DAC 6 weeks vs SR 7 weeks, P = 0.55) or definitive treatment (surgery/chemoradiation) ( DAC 8 weeks vs SR 9 weeks, P = 0.81) was not significantly improved with DAC . Among SR only, time to diagnosis was 9 weeks pre‐intervention versus 5 weeks post‐intervention ( P = 0.13), and time to treatment was 11 weeks pre‐intervention versus 6 weeks post‐intervention ( P = 0.07). Conclusion There was no statistically significant improvement in time to colorectal cancer diagnosis or treatment among patients referred through DAC compared to SR . There was a trend towards improved waiting times for SR concurrent with the introduction of the DAC pathway, indicating improvement of all referral processes. DAC may not be effective at expediting colorectal cancer diagnosis if it is not accompanied by strict referral guidelines. Larger evaluations of DAC are required in the Australian context.