Literature DB >> 16882373

Negative chest X-rays in primary care patients with lung cancer.

Sally Stapley1, Deborah Sharp, William Hamilton.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The main investigation for suspected lung cancer in primary care is a chest X-ray. Reports from secondary care show that some patients with normal chest X-rays transpire to have lung cancer. The assumption is that this occurs rarely in primary care. AIM: The aim of this study was to examine the frequency of misleading chest X-rays in primary care, and whether there were any particular symptoms associated with them. DESIGN OF STUDY: Retrospective cohort study of the primary care records of 247 lung cancer patients diagnosed between 1998-2002.
SETTING: All general practices in Exeter Primary Care Trust, Devon, UK.
METHOD: All chest X-rays and all common symptoms of lung cancer reported to primary care were identified from the medical records. X-ray results were categorised into three groups by the radiologist's report: normal; abnormal but no malignancy suspected (together classified as negative X-rays); or abnormal with possible malignancy.
RESULTS: Of the 247 patients, 164 (66%) had a chest X-ray taken in primary care during the year before diagnosis: 126 of these (77%) were abnormal with possible malignancy; 21 (13%) were abnormal but with no malignancy suspected; in 17 (10%) the X-ray was reported as normal. Thus, 38 of 164 patients (23%; 95% confidence interval = 16 to 32%) had a negative X-ray. Negative X-rays were less common in the 90 days before diagnosis. No particular symptoms were significantly associated with negative X-rays.
CONCLUSION: Nearly a quarter of chest X-rays requested from primary care in lung cancer patients are negative. Further investigation is warranted with continuing or changing symptoms, even if the X-ray is not suggestive of malignancy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16882373      PMCID: PMC1874519     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  16 in total

1.  [Frequency and causes of hemoptysis and role of bronchoscopy in patients with normal chest roentgenogram hospitalized in the Department of Physiopneumonology Silesian Medical University in the years 1961-1996].

Authors:  J Kamiński
Journal:  Pneumonol Alergol Pol       Date:  2001

2.  Detecting lung cancer as a cause of hemoptysis in patients with a normal chest radiograph: bronchoscopy vs CT.

Authors:  G L Colice
Journal:  Chest       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 9.410

3.  Miss rate of lung cancer on the chest radiograph in clinical practice.

Authors:  L G Quekel; A G Kessels; R Goei; J M van Engelshoven
Journal:  Chest       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 9.410

4.  Bronchoscopy to evaluate hemoptysis in older men with nonsuspicious chest roentgenograms.

Authors:  F A Lederle; K L Nichol; C M Parenti
Journal:  Chest       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 9.410

5.  Fast-growing squamous cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Ching-Lih Shyu; Yu-Chin Lee; Reury-Perng Perng
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 5.705

6.  Cause and evaluation of chronic dyspnea in a pulmonary disease clinic.

Authors:  M R Pratter; F J Curley; J Dubois; R S Irwin
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1989-10

7.  Hemoptysis: etiology, evaluation, and outcome in a tertiary referral hospital.

Authors:  B Hirshberg; I Biran; M Glazer; M R Kramer
Journal:  Chest       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 9.410

8.  Chronic dyspnea unexplained by history, physical examination, chest roentgenogram, and spirometry. Analysis of a seven-year experience.

Authors:  W J DePaso; R H Winterbauer; J A Lusk; D F Dreis; S C Springmeyer
Journal:  Chest       Date:  1991-11       Impact factor: 9.410

9.  Hemoptysis. Indications for bronchoscopy.

Authors:  K M O'Neil; A A Lazarus
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1991-01

10.  Missed lung cancer at CT: imaging findings in nine patients.

Authors:  J W Gurney
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  33 in total

1.  Imaging in primary care.

Authors:  Graham Cherryman
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Improving early diagnosis of cancer in UK general practice.

Authors:  Ian Morgan; Scott Wilkes
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 3.  Systematic review of guidelines for the management of suspected lung cancer in primary care.

Authors:  M Elisabeth Del Giudice; Sheila-Mae Young; Emily T Vella; Marla Ash; Praveen Bansal; Andrew Robinson; Roland Skrastins; Yee Ung; Robert Zeldin; Cheryl Levitt
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  Sensitivity of chest X-ray for detecting lung cancer in people presenting with symptoms: a systematic review.

Authors:  Stephen H Bradley; Sarah Abraham; Matthew Ej Callister; Adam Grice; William T Hamilton; Rocio Rodriguez Lopez; Bethany Shinkins; Richard D Neal
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2019-11-28       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Chest X-ray in suspected lung cancer is harmful.

Authors:  Robert W Foley; Vanessa Nassour; Helen C Oliver; Toby Hall; Vidan Masani; Graham Robinson; Jonathan C L Rodrigues; Benjamin J Hudson
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-01-30       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Delay in diagnosis of lung cancer in general practice.

Authors:  Marianne Bjerager; Torben Palshof; Ronald Dahl; Peter Vedsted; Frede Olesen
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 5.386

7.  Primary care radiography in the early diagnosis of lung cancer.

Authors:  Trevor K Rogers
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2010-03-16       Impact factor: 3.909

8.  Evaluation of risk assessment tools for suspected cancer in general practice: a cohort study.

Authors:  William Hamilton; Trish Green; Tanimola Martins; Kathy Elliott; Greg Rubin; Una Macleod
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 5.386

9.  Five misconceptions in cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  William Hamilton
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 5.386

10.  The CAPER studies: five case-control studies aimed at identifying and quantifying the risk of cancer in symptomatic primary care patients.

Authors:  W Hamilton
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-12-03       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.