Understanding the role of GPs’ gut feelings in diagnosing cancer in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing evidence
Tóm tắt
Growing evidence for the role of GPs’ gut feelings in cancer diagnosis raises questions about their origin and role in clinical practice.
To explore the origins of GPs’ gut feelings for cancer, their use, and their diagnostic utility.
Systematic review and meta-analysis of international research on GPs’ gut feelings in primary care.
Six databases were searched from inception to July 2019, and internet searches were conducted. A segregated method was used to analyse, then combine, quantitative and qualitative findings.
Twelve articles and four online resources were included that described varied conceptualisations of gut feelings. Gut feelings were often initially associated with patients being unwell, rather than with a suspicion of cancer, and were commonly experienced in response to symptoms and non-verbal cues. The pooled odds of a cancer diagnosis were four times higher when gut feelings were recorded (OR 4.24, 95% confidence interval = 2.26 to 7.94); they became more predictive of cancer as clinical experience and familiarity with the patient increased. Despite being included in some clinical guidelines, GPs had varying experiences of acting on gut feelings as some specialists questioned their diagnostic value. Consequently, some GPs ignored or omitted gut feelings from referral letters, or chose investigations that did not require specialist approval.
GPs’ gut feelings for cancer were conceptualised as a rapid summing up of multiple verbal and non-verbal patient cues in the context of the GPs’ clinical knowledge and experience. Triggers of gut feelings not included in referral guidance deserve further investigation as predictors of cancer. Non-verbal cues that trigger gut feelings appear to be reliant on continuity of care and clinical experience; they tend to remain poorly recorded and are, therefore, inaccessible to researchers.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Lee, 2006, Diagnostic practise in nursing: a critical review of the literature, Nurs Health Sci, 8, 57, 10.1111/j.1442-2018.2006.00267.x
Stolper, 2009, Consensus on gut feelings in general practice, BMC Fam Pract, 10, 66, 10.1186/1471-2296-10-66
Summerton N Primary care diagnostics: the patient-centred approach in the new commissioning environment 2nd edn Boca Raton, FL CRC Press 2011
Peters, 2017, Examining the influence of context and professional culture on clinical reasoning through rhetorical-narrative analysis, Qual Health Res, 27, 866, 10.1177/1049732316650418
Kahneman D Thinking, fast and slow New York, NY Farrar, Straus and Giroux 2011
Marewski, 2012, Heuristic decision making in medicine, Dialogues Clin Neurosci, 14, 77, 10.31887/DCNS.2012.14.1/jmarewski
Greenhalgh, 2002, Intuition and evidence — uneasy bedfellows?, Br J Gen Pract, 52, 395
Donker GA Wiersma E van der Hoek L Heins M Determinants of general practitioner’s cancer-related gut feelings — a prospective cohort study BMJ Open 2016 DOI
Hamilton W Five misconceptions in cancer diagnosis Br J Gen Pract 2009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp09X420860.
Buntinx F Mant D Van den Bruel A Dealing with low-incidence serious diseases in general practice Br J Gen Pract 2011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp11X548974.
Critical Appraisal Skills Programme CASP Qualitative Checklist 2018 2018 https://casp-uk.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CASP-Qualitative-Checklist-2018_fillable_form.pdf (accessed 29 Jul 2020).
Critical Appraisal Skills Programme CASP Cohort Study Checklist 2018 2018 https://casp-uk.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/CASP-Cohort-Study-Checklist_2018.pdf (accessed 29 Jul 2020).
The Joanna Briggs Institute The Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual 2014: the systematic review of economic evaluation evidence 2014 https://nursing.lsuhsc.edu/JBI/docs/ReviewersManuals/Economic.pdf (accessed 30 Jul 2020).
Boyatzis RE Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code development Thousand Oaks, CA Sage Publications 1998
Bankhead CR Identifying potentially significant diagnostic factors for ovarian cancer in primary care: a qualitative and quantitative study [PhD thesis/dissertation]. 2005 https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.427901 (accessed 5 Aug 2020).
Green, 2015, Cancer detection in primary care: insights from general practitioners, Br J Cancer, 112, S41, 10.1038/bjc.2015.41
Robinson S What are the factors influencing GPs in the recognition and referral of suspected lung cancer? [PhD thesis/dissertation]. https://hydra.hull.ac.uk/resources/hull:13930 (accessed 30 Jul 2020).
Holtedahl, 2017, Abdominal symptoms in general practice: frequency, cancer suspicions raised, and actions taken by GPs in six European countries. Cohort study with prospective registration of cancer, Heliyon, 3, e00328, 10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00328
Hjertholm P Moth G Ingeman ML Vedsted P Predictive values of GPs’ suspicion of serious disease: a population-based follow-up study Br J Gen Pract 2014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp14X680125.
Ingeman, 2015, The Danish cancer pathway for patients with serious non-specific symptoms and signs of cancer — a cross-sectional study of patient characteristics and cancer probability, BMC Cancer, 15, 421, 10.1186/s12885-015-1424-5
Scheel BI Cancer suspicion in general practice: the role of symptoms and patient characteristics, and their association with subsequent cancer Br J Gen Pract 2013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp13X671614.
National Collaborating Centre for Cancer Suspected cancer: recognition and referral NICE guideline Full guideline. June 2015 https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng12/evidence/full-guideline-pdf-2676000277 (accessed 30 Jul 2020).
Robinson S Poirier V Watson S Using Cancer Decision Support Tools to support the early diagnosis of cancer 2017 https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/sites/default/files/ace_cancer_decision_support_tools_final_report_v1.1_080517_0.pdf (accessed 30 Jul 2020).
Public Health Wales Innovative new clinic helps faster cancer diagnosis 2017 http://www.wales.nhs.uk/sitesplus/888/news/45820 (accessed 30 Jul 2020).
Accelerate, Coordinate, Evaluate (ACE) Programme Multidisciplinary Diagnostic Centre (MDC) based pathways for patients with non-specific but concerning symptoms: interim report 2018 https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/sites/default/files/ace_programme_mdc_interim_report_may_2018v2.4.pdf (accessed 30 Jul 2020).
Higgins JPT Green S Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0 London The Cochrane Collaboration 2011
Shephard EA Neal RD Rose P Quantifying the risk of multiple myeloma from symptoms reported in primary care patients: a large case–control study using electronic records Br J Gen Pract 2015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp15X683545.
Vanstone, 2019, Experienced physician descriptions of intuition in clinical reasoning: a typology, Diagnosis (Berl), 6, 259, 10.1515/dx-2018-0069
Le Reste, 2013, The transculturality of ‘gut feelings’. Results from a French Delphi consensus survey, Eur J Gen Pract, 19, 237, 10.3109/13814788.2013.779662
Stolper, 2010, How do disciplinary tribunals evaluate the “gut feelings” of doctors? An analysis of Dutch tribunal decisions, 2000–2008, J Law Med, 18, 68
Goyder CR Jones CHD Heneghan CJ Thompson MJ Missed opportunities for diagnosis: lessons learned from diagnostic errors in primary care Br J Gen Pract 2015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp15X687889.
Price S Spencer A Medina-Lara A Hamilton W Availability and use of cancer decision-support tools: a cross-sectional survey of UK primary care Br J Gen Pract 2019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp19X703745.