OBJECTIVE: To assess the results achieved with a rapid referral pathway for suspected colorectal cancer (CRC), comparing with the standard referral pathway. METHODS: Three-year audit of patients suspected of having CRC routed via a rapid referral pathway, and patients with CRC routed via the standard referral pathway of a health care district serving a population of 498,000 in Madrid (Spain). Outcomes included referral criteria met, waiting times, cancer diagnosed and stage of disease. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy-two patients (mean age 68.8 years, SD 14.0; 51% male) were routed via the rapid referral pathway for colonoscopy. Seventy-nine per cent of referrals fulfilled the criteria for high risk of CRC. Fifty-two cancers were diagnosed: 26% Stage A (Astler-Coller), 36% Stage B, 24% Stage C and 14% Stage D. Average waiting time to colonoscopy for the rapid referral patients was 18.5 days (SD 19.1) and average waiting time to surgery was 28.6 days (SD 23.9). Colonoscopy was performed within 15 days in 65% of CRC rapid referral patients compared to 43% of standard pathway patients (P = 0.004). Overall waiting time for patients with CRC in the rapid referral pathway was 52.7 days (SD 32.9); while for those in the standard pathway, it was 71.5 days (SD 57.4) (P = 0.002). Twenty-six per cent Stage A CRC was diagnosed in the rapid referral pathway compared to 12% in the standard pathway (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The rapid referral pathway reduced waiting time to colonoscopy and overall waiting time to final treatment and appears to be an effective strategy for diagnosing CRC in its early stages.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the results achieved with a rapid referral pathway for suspected colorectal cancer (CRC), comparing with the standard referral pathway. METHODS: Three-year audit of patients suspected of having CRC routed via a rapid referral pathway, and patients with CRC routed via the standard referral pathway of a health care district serving a population of 498,000 in Madrid (Spain). Outcomes included referral criteria met, waiting times, cancer diagnosed and stage of disease. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy-two patients (mean age 68.8 years, SD 14.0; 51% male) were routed via the rapid referral pathway for colonoscopy. Seventy-nine per cent of referrals fulfilled the criteria for high risk of CRC. Fifty-two cancers were diagnosed: 26% Stage A (Astler-Coller), 36% Stage B, 24% Stage C and 14% Stage D. Average waiting time to colonoscopy for the rapid referral patients was 18.5 days (SD 19.1) and average waiting time to surgery was 28.6 days (SD 23.9). Colonoscopy was performed within 15 days in 65% of CRC rapid referral patients compared to 43% of standard pathway patients (P = 0.004). Overall waiting time for patients with CRC in the rapid referral pathway was 52.7 days (SD 32.9); while for those in the standard pathway, it was 71.5 days (SD 57.4) (P = 0.002). Twenty-six per cent Stage A CRC was diagnosed in the rapid referral pathway compared to 12% in the standard pathway (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The rapid referral pathway reduced waiting time to colonoscopy and overall waiting time to final treatment and appears to be an effective strategy for diagnosing CRC in its early stages.
Authors: Antonieta Medina-Lara; Bogdan Grigore; Ruth Lewis; Jaime Peters; Sarah Price; Paolo Landa; Sophie Robinson; Richard Neal; William Hamilton; Anne E Spencer Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-11 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Zeta Chow; Patrick Osterhaus; Bin Huang; Quan Chen; Nancy Schoenberg; Mark Dignan; B Mark Evers; Avinash Bhakta Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2020-10-20 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Henry Jensen; Marie Louise Tørring; Morten Fenger-Grøn; Frede Olesen; Jens Overgaard; Peter Vedsted Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2016-03-29 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: R D Neal; P Tharmanathan; B France; N U Din; S Cotton; J Fallon-Ferguson; W Hamilton; A Hendry; M Hendry; R Lewis; U Macleod; E D Mitchell; M Pickett; T Rai; K Shaw; N Stuart; M L Tørring; C Wilkinson; B Williams; N Williams; J Emery Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2015-03-31 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Henry Jensen; Marie Louise Tørring; Frede Olesen; Jens Overgaard; Morten Fenger-Grøn; Peter Vedsted Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2015-04-23 Impact factor: 4.430