Readiness Assessment Optimisation Toolkit for GPs to adopt PDAC Tests
Research type
Research Study
Full title
A Readiness Assessment and Optimisation Toolkit to Support General Practices Prepare to Adopt New Non-Invasive Pancreatic Cancer Biomarker Tests
IRAS ID
330521
Contact name
Patrick Kierkegaard
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Imperial College London
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 7 months, 28 days
Research summary
Research Summary:
What are the aims of the study?
To develop a toolkit that will help assess general practices readiness to adopt specific types of novel pancreatic cancer biomarker tests and provide recommendations for optimisation.Why is this so relevant and important for people affected by pancreatic cancer?
Getting these tests into primary care will be difficult because many general practices may not be ready or able to use them. Patients living in deprived or rural areas may not have access to the tests. Surgeries may not have the trained staff or money available to use the tests. Our “toolkit” will find out if different types of general practices are able and ready to start using these new tests and identify what support they will need from the NHS to be prepared.Why is this project innovative in the field of pancreatic cancer?
There is no procedure in place that can specifically check and measure how ready general practices are to adopt new pancreatic cancer tests and identify what support and resources are needed to facilitate adoption.What are you planning to do?
We will talk to healthcare professionals, patients, carers, and key decision makers to find out what support and advice is needed so that doctors’ surgeries can prepare and plan to use the new tests.
We will hold focus groups with patients, carers, healthcare professionals, and key decision makers will discuss the results from the first part of the study and co-design the toolkit. We will make sure that our toolkit will have a real impact in primary care.Summary of Results:
Thank you to everyone who took part.
This study looked at how ready general practices are to use new pancreatic cancer tests in the future. Some of these tests may use samples such as blood, urine or breath. The study did not test a new cancer test on patients. Instead, it looked at what would help or block the use of new tests in everyday general practice.
This research was led by Imperial College London and funded by Pancreatic Cancer UK. The team spoke to 41 people, including general practitioners, practice managers, patients, carers and community representatives. The team also ran two workshops with patients and carers to help design the toolkit and held three public events in Leicester, Penzance and Tower Hamlets.
The study found that readiness depends on more than equipment or training. Three things mattered most. First, patients need timely access to appointments and better continuity of care, so they can see the same clinician when symptoms continue. Second, clinicians need enough time, support and confidence to consider pancreatic cancer when symptoms are vague. Third, patients and communities need clear information, trust in services and support to raise concerns early.
Many patients and carers said they had to do too much of the work themselves. This included chasing appointments, following up test results and pushing for further action. The team found that this could make delays worse for people who already face barriers, such as caring responsibilities, language barriers or difficulty getting appointments.
The study produced an early version of a toolkit for general practices. It is designed to help practices identify gaps and plan improvements before new pancreatic cancer tests are introduced. Because the project was delayed by approvals and recruitment problems, the toolkit still needs final development with practice staff and testing in real settings.
Overall, the findings suggest that new tests alone are unlikely to be enough. Better access to care, clearer communication, stronger continuity and better support for patients and clinicians will also be needed. The next step is to finish the toolkit with practice teams and then pilot it in a range of practices.
REC name
Yorkshire & The Humber - Sheffield Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
24/YH/0146
Date of REC Opinion
5 Aug 2024
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion