POSCAN (GP-patient communication about POSsible CANcer) Study 1
Research type
Research Study
Full title
A video-based secondary analysis of UK GP consultations to explore GP – patient communication about direct access tests and referral for investigation of possible cancer.
IRAS ID
227119
Contact name
Lucy Brindle
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Southampton
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 5 months, 31 days
Research summary
In order to improve early diagnosis of cancer, the threshold for urgent investigation (tests) has been lowered in UK national guidelines. This may mean that more patients will be referred to specialists or offered tests for symptoms that could indicate cancer. Although most patients recommended for tests will not have cancer, being offered investigation(s) may cause patient concern. Furthermore, the word ‘cancer’ may not be used when physicians suspect a possible cancer and recommend subsequent investigations/referrals. To date, little is known about how best to meet patients’ information needs when referrals/tests for possible cancer are recommended within consultations, or the implications of these discussions for patients’ intentions to attend for tests.
This qualitative secondary analysis study will examine a sample of video-recorded GP-patient consultations which were collected by previous studies at the University of Bristol, University College London and University of Southampton. We will analyse how GPs recommend and discuss further investigations/referrals with patients using Conversation Analysis (CA). The team have screened consultations (n=185) from the dataset held at Southampton and found that indirect language is often used by GPs (e.g. “nasty causes of cough”; “something ominous”) rather than the word ‘cancer’ when recommending further investigations. The POSCAN research team have successfully obtained funding from Cancer Research UK (CRUK) to explore these findings in greater detail, but require additional data to identify the predominant communication patterns during these discussions. There is a large dataset of GP-patient video recordings stored at the University of Bristol and a second dataset being collected at the University College London. Participants in both studies were given the option of consenting to their recorded consultations being used for future research, subject to further ethical approval. Video-recordings of consultations where investigation of possible cancer is discussed, along with anonymised linked medical (referral/investigations) information and socio-demographic details, will be analysed.
REC name
North West - Haydock Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
17/NW/0276
Date of REC Opinion
4 May 2017
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion