Role of primary care physician factors on diagnostic testing and referral decisions for symptoms of possible cancer: a systematic review

Abstract

BackgroundMissed opportunities for diagnosing cancer cause patients harm and have been attributed to suboptimal use of tests and referral pathways in primary care. Primary care physician (PCP) factors have been suggested to affect decisions to investigate cancer, but their influence is poorly understood.ObjectiveTo synthesise evidence evaluating the influence of PCP factors on decisions to investigate symptoms of possible cancer.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL and PsycINFO between January 1990 and March 2021 for relevant citations. Studies examining the effect or perceptions and experiences of PCP factors on use of tests and referrals for symptomatic patients with any cancer were included. PCP factors comprised personal characteristics and attributes of physicians in clinical practice.Data extraction and synthesisCritical appraisal and data extraction were undertaken independently by two authors. Due to study heterogeneity, data could not be statistically pooled. We, therefore, performed a narrative synthesis.Results29 studies were included. Most studies were conducted in European countries. A total of 11 PCP factors were identified comprising modifiable and non-modifiable factors. Clinical judgement of symptoms as suspicious or 'alarm' prompted more investigations than non-alarm symptoms. ‘Gut feeling’ predicted a subsequent cancer diagnosis and was perceived to facilitate decisions to investigate non-specific symptoms as PCP experience increased. Female PCPs investigated cancer more than male PCPs. The effect of PCP age and years of experience on testing and referral decisions was inconclusive.ConclusionsPCP interpretation of symptoms as higher risk facilitated testing and referral decisions for possible cancer. However, in the absence of 'alarm' symptoms or ‘gut feeling’, PCPs may not investigate cancer. PCPs require strategies for identifying patients with non-alarm and non-specific symptoms who need testing or referral.PROSPERO registration numberCRD420191560515.

Understanding GPs’ referral decisions for younger patients with symptoms of cancer: a qualitative interview study

“…The findings add to earlier work demonstrating that, although GPs consider the guidelines helpful overall, especially for patients with clear-cut symptoms, they may act as a barrier for patients not fitting the criteria, because of the perceived lack of flexibility and limited scope for clinical judgement. 13 – 15 Although the role of ‘gut feeling’ in driving GPs’ decisions has been examined previously, 16 , 17 the findings of this study extend the literature on its crucial influence on referral of younger patients. GPs described a struggle in reconciling their dual role as patient advocate and gatekeeper of resources, and the deep sense of worry of potentially missing a cancer diagnosis, which often led them to a cautionary approach.…”

Exploring why European primary care physicians sometimes do not think of, or act on, a possible cancer diagnosis. A qualitative study

“… 26 The present study's responders’ reports of inadequate plans for follow-up, as well as reassurance from normal test results, have also been reported by other researchers. 8 , 30 , 31 …”

What would primary care practitioners do differently after a delayed cancer diagnosis? Learning lessons from their experiences

“…Some PCPs in our study regretted not having acted on their sense of alarm, and doing so might have helped to trigger investigations for cancer [ 20 ]. This is supported by a Nordic study, in which some doctors recognised that intuitive feelings of alarm helped them to come to think of cancer during a clinical encounter [ 21 ].…”