Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (24)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rose, P. W
Right arrow Articles by Lucassen, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rose, P. W
Right arrow Articles by Lucassen, A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Family Practice Vol. 18, No. 5, 487-490
© Oxford University Press 2001


Genetics

Referral of patients with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer—GPs' knowledge and expectations

Peter W Rose, Eila Watson, Patricia Yudkin, Jon Emery, Mike Murphy, Alice Fuller and Anneke Lucassena

Department of Primary Health Care, University of Oxford and
a Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK.

Peter W Rose, ICRF General Practice Research Group, Department of Primary Health Care, University of Oxford, Institute of Health Sciences, Old Road, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK.

Background. Primary care is expected to play a significant role in the management of patients with genetic problems. Currently, this particularly involves patients with a family history of cancer. If GPs are to exercise their gatekeeper role efficiently in this area, they must be able to evaluate genetic risk and make appropriate referral decisions.

Objectives. The aim of this study was to examine GPs' ability to assess risk and to make appropriate referral decisions for women with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer, and to determine their expectations of a referral to secondary care.

Method. A questionnaire survey was carried out of the 282 GP principals working within Bedfordshire Health Authority. GPs were asked to make decisions for six simulated cases of women presenting with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer.

Results. A total of 164 (58%) GPs returned completed questionnaires. Across the six family histories, the percentage of GPs making an appropriate risk assessment ranged from 21% [95% confidence interval (CI) 14–27%] to 63% (95% CI 56–71%), and an appropriate referral decision ranged from 40% (95% CI 32–48%) to 80% (95% CI 73–86%). Regardless of their accuracy of risk assessment, most GPs were consistent in deciding not to refer low risk women and to refer moderate and high risk women (range 71–85% of GPs for the six family histories). Only 43 (26%, 95% CI 20–33%) of GPs knew the three most important criteria for risk assessment.

Conclusions. GPs require more help and education to enable them to perform their gatekeeper role satisfactorily when assessing patients with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer.

Keywords. Breast cancer, GPs, ovarian cancer, referral, risk assessment.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Fam PractHome page
M. Jiwa, J. Reid, C. Handley, J. Grimwood, S. Ward, K. Turner, M. Ibbotson, and N. Thorman
Less haste more speed: factors that prolong the interval from presentation to diagnosis in some cancers
Fam. Pract., June 1, 2004; 21(3): 299 - 303.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann Fam MedHome page
R. Gramling, J. Nash, K. Siren, C. Eaton, and L. Culpepper
Family Physician Self-Efficacy With Screening for Inherited Cancer Risk
Ann. Fam. Med, March 1, 2004; 2(2): 130 - 132.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Fam PractHome page
J. Knottnerus
Community genetics and community medicine
Fam. Pract., October 1, 2003; 20(5): 601 - 606.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.