Dataset Information

High-risk basal cell carcinoma excision in primary care: a retrospective observational study of compliance with NICE guidance.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To assess compliance with 2010 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on cancer services relating to the management of basal cell carcinomas (BCC) in the community, where except in specific circumstances it is recommended that only low-risk BCCs should be excised routinely.

Design and setting

A retrospective observational study of the histopathology reports of BCC excisions received from primary care in two district general hospitals in the South of England. One hundred consecutive BCC excisions were analysed from each hospital.

Outcome measures

The numbers of high-risk BCCs excised in primary care according to histological subtype, anatomical site and age and if these excisions were compliant with NICE 2010 guidance. Completeness of excision and mention of BCC on histology request were secondary outcomes.

Results

Histologically high-risk subtypes were present in 32% (64/200) of BCCs excised in the community. Only 17/64 were excised by general practitioners (GPs) who were accredited to do so. Non-compliance regarding anatomical site occurred in 16% of samples; only one was non-compliant regarding patient age. There was a high overall rate of complete excision (94.5%) with variation in presence of the term BCC on histology request forms.

Conclusions

NICE 2010 guidance relating to BCC excision in primary care was not followed in a considerable number of cases. Compliance with NICE 2010 guidance depends on the ability to recognise high-risk BCCs clinically and manage appropriately. It also shows that despite close supervision by secondary care, there are still failures of compliance.GP training in identification of subtypes of BCC might be improved, as well as an increase in numbers of GPs accredited to carry out high-risk BCC excisions. Difficulty in diagnosing high-risk histological subtypes of BCC preoperatively should be considered in any future revision of NICE guidance.

SUBMITTER: Cole SJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6278784 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

High-risk basal cell carcinoma excision in primary care: a retrospective observational study of compliance with NICE guidance.

Cole Simon John SJ Howes Rachel R Meehan Chris C Cole Richard R

BMJ open 20190222 11

<h4>Objectives</h4>To assess compliance with 2010 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on cancer services relating to the management of basal cell carcinomas (BCC) in the community, where except in specific circumstances it is recommended that only low-risk BCCs should be excised routinely.<h4>Design and setting</h4>A retrospective observational study of the histopathology reports of BCC excisions received from primary care in two district general hospitals in the So ...[more]

PMID: 30798290

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Recurrence of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) after complete surgical excision is rarely reported. Risk factors for this negative outcome are not well-studied. We present the clinical and histological features of recurrent BCCs in our institution. Methods All patients between January 2016 to December 2020 whose primary BCCs were excised with free surgical margins according to the histopathology report, and represented later with local recurrence were included. The medical files were retrieved to record patient's age, sex, sun exposure, tumor site, size, clinical diagnosis, histopathology variant of primary lesion, least free margin distance of the original lesion, and recurrence time. Results Eighteen patients (11 males and 7 females ranged between 50 and 75 years old) fulfilled the inclusion criteria; all of their lesions were located in head and neck regions. The mean recurrence time was 31.2 months (11–86) and the histological variant was the same of primary in 17/18 patients. Primary tumors showed nodular subtype in 77.8% of patients and 55.6% of the primary tumors were less than 15 mm in diameter. Sun exposure history was given by 77.8% of patients while the rest of patients had non-significant exposure. All recurrent excised lesions were of free margin less than 4 mm. Conclusion We found that the primary tumors of all studied recurrent BCCs were excised with surgical margins less than 4 mm. We recommend follow up for all excised BCCs either those of low or high risk histological variants. Tumor size does not appear a considerable risk factor for local recurrence. Highlights • We report recurrent BCCs in 18 patients, all were located in head and neck region.• Sun exposure history was given by 77.8% of patients while the rest of patients gave a negative history of sun exposure.• Nodular histological subtype was seen in 77.8% of patients.• All primary tumors were excised by general or plastic surgeons with a surgical margin less than 4 mm.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess how long the UK's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence's (NICE) Technology Appraisal Programme has taken to produce guidance and to determine independent predictors of time to guidance.DesignRetrospective time to event (survival) analysis.SettingTechnology Appraisal guidance produced by NICE. DATASOURCE: All appraisals referred to NICE by February 2010 were included, except those referred prior to 2001 and a number that were suspended.Outcome measureDuration from the start of an appraisal (when the scope document was released) until publication of guidance.ResultsSingle Technology Appraisals (STAs) were published significantly faster than Multiple Technology Appraisals (MTAs) with median durations of 48.0 (IQR; 44.3-75.4) and 74.0 (IQR; 60.9-114.0) weeks, respectively (p?<0.0001). Median time to publication exceeded published process timelines, even after adjusting for appeals. Results from the modelling suggest that STAs published guidance significantly faster than MTAs after adjusting for other covariates (by 36.2 weeks (95% CI -46.05 to -26.42 weeks)) and that appeals against provisional guidance significantly increased the time to publication (by 42.83 weeks (95% CI 35.50 to 50.17 weeks)). There was no evidence that STAs of cancer-related technologies took longer to complete compared with STAs of other technologies after adjusting for potentially confounding variables and only weak evidence suggesting that the time to produce guidance is increasing each year (by 1.40 weeks (95% CI -0.35 to 2.94 weeks)).ConclusionsThe results from this study suggest that the STA process has resulted in significantly faster guidance compared with the MTA process irrespective of the topic, but that these gains are lost if appeals are made against provisional guidance. While NICE processes continue to evolve over time, a trade-off might be that decisions take longer but at present there is no evidence of a significant increase in duration.

Project description:BackgroundPrimary Spine Care (PSC) is an innovative model for the primary management of patients with spine-related disorders (SRDs), with a focus on the use of non-pharmacological therapies which now constitute the recommended first-line approach to back pain. PSC clinicians serve as the initial or early point of contact for spine patients and utilize evidence-based spine care pathways to improve outcomes and reduce escalation of care (EoC; e.g., spinal injections, diagnostic imaging, hospitalizations, referrals to a specialist). The present study examined 6-month outcomes to evaluate the efficiency of care for patients who received PSC as compared to conventional primary care. We hypothesized that patients seen by a PSC clinician would have lower rates of EoC compared to patients who received usual care by a primary care (PC) clinician.MethodsThis was a retrospective observational study. We evaluated 6-month outcomes for two groups seen and treated for an SRD between February 01, 2017 and January 31, 2020. Patient groups were comprised of N = 1363 PSC patients (Group A) and N = 1329 PC patients (Group B). We conducted Pearson chi-square and logistic regression (adjusting for patient characteristics that were unbalanced between the two groups) to determine associations between the two groups and 6-month outcomes.ResultsWithin six months of an initial visit for an SRD, a statistically significantly smaller proportion of PSC patients utilized healthcare resources for spine care as compared to the PC patients. When adjusting for patient characteristics, those who received care from the PSC clinician were less likely within 6 months of an initial visit to be hospitalized (OR = .47, 95% CI .23-.97), fill a prescription for an opioid analgesic (OR = .43; 95% CI .29-.65), receive a spinal injection (OR = .56, 95% CI .33-.95), or have a visit with a specialist (OR = .48, 95% CI .35-.67) as compared to those who received usual primary care.ConclusionsPatients who received PSC in an academic primary care clinic experienced significantly less escalation of their spine care within 6 months of their initial visit. The PSC model may offer a more efficient approach to the primary care of spine problems for patients with SRDs, as compared to usual primary care.

Dataset Information

High-risk basal cell carcinoma excision in primary care: a retrospective observational study of compliance with NICE guidance.

Objectives

Design and setting

Outcome measures

Results

Conclusions

Publications

High-risk basal cell carcinoma excision in primary care: a retrospective observational study of compliance with NICE guidance.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets