Suppr超能文献

全科医生与癌症登记的完整性。

General practitioners and completeness of cancer registry.

作者信息

Berkel J

机构信息

Comprehensive Cancer Centre IKMN, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

J Epidemiol Community Health. 1990 Jun;44(2):121-4. doi: 10.1136/jech.44.2.121.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the role of the general practitioner as a source of information for a cancer registry.

DESIGN

The study involved a random sample of respondents to a letter inviting participation which was sent to all general practitioners in a specific area. Participating doctors were visited to maximise cooperation. Data collection consisted of setting up a retrospective (prevalence) registry of cancer patients diagnosed over a 20 month period, and a prospective (incidence) register over a subsequent 12 month period. The general practitioner cancer file was then linked to the total cancer registry data base to estimate missed cases.

SETTING

The study took place in the catchment area of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre Middle-Netherlands (IKMN).

PARTICIPANTS

Of 448 general practitioners in the IKMN region, 152 were willing to participate and of these 52 were randomly selected to take part (11% of all general practitioners in the region).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 1637 tumours were identified from the general practitioners, of which 252 (15.4%) were not included in the cancer registry. Of these, only 22 (1.3%) were not included in the registry because they had tumours diagnosed clinically in outpatients and therefore had been omitted from the usual sources of information available to the cancer registry (pathology reports, hospital discharge letters). The missed cases were mostly older patients with digestive tract tumours.

CONCLUSIONS

On cost-benefit grounds it was not considered feasible to initiate an active cancer registration system among general practitioners, provided that notification of pathological examinations to the registry is complete. Limited under-registration will occur when death certificates cannot be used as an additional source of information.

摘要

研究目的

本研究旨在评估全科医生作为癌症登记信息来源的作用。

设计

该研究涉及对一封邀请参与的信件的随机抽样回复者,该信件发送给特定区域的所有全科医生。为了最大限度地促进合作,对参与的医生进行了走访。数据收集包括建立一个回顾性(患病率)登记册,记录在20个月期间诊断出的癌症患者,以及随后12个月期间的前瞻性(发病率)登记册。然后将全科医生的癌症档案与总癌症登记数据库相链接,以估计漏报病例。

背景

该研究在荷兰中部综合癌症中心(IKMN)的服务区域内进行。

参与者

在IKMN地区的448名全科医生中,152名愿意参与,其中52名被随机选中参与(占该地区所有全科医生的11%)。

测量与主要结果

从全科医生处共识别出1637例肿瘤,其中252例(15.4%)未被纳入癌症登记册。其中,只有22例(1.3%)未被纳入登记册是因为它们是在门诊临床诊断出的肿瘤,因此被癌症登记册通常可用的信息来源(病理报告、医院出院信件)遗漏。漏报病例大多是患有消化道肿瘤的老年患者。

结论

基于成本效益的考虑,如果向登记册通报病理检查是完整的,那么在全科医生中启动一个积极的癌症登记系统被认为是不可行的。当死亡证明不能用作额外的信息来源时,将会出现有限的登记不足情况。

相似文献

1
General practitioners and completeness of cancer registry.全科医生与癌症登记的完整性。
J Epidemiol Community Health. 1990 Jun;44(2):121-4. doi: 10.1136/jech.44.2.121.
2
[Completeness of the cancer registry].[癌症登记的完整性]
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1989 Oct 14;133(41):2027-30.

引用本文的文献

7
Incidence of primary malignant orbital tumours in the Netherlands.荷兰原发性眼眶恶性肿瘤的发病率。
Eye (Lond). 2011 Apr;25(4):461-5. doi: 10.1038/eye.2011.9. Epub 2011 Feb 18.
8
[Characteristics of diagnoses of malignant neoplasms in primary care].[基层医疗中恶性肿瘤诊断的特征]
Aten Primaria. 2002 Apr 30;29(7):407-13. doi: 10.1016/s0212-6567(02)70596-9.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验