Prospective analysis of scrotal pathology referrals - Are referrals appropriate and accurate?

Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England

Volumn 88, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 363-366

  Foster, Paul W ^a,b   Ritchie, Alastair W S ^a   Jones, David J ^a  

^a GLOUCESTERSHIRE HOSPITALS NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^b BRISTOL ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Scrotal swellings; Testicular cancer

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CHILD; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HEALTH CENTER; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDICAL RECORD; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; PATIENT REFERRAL; PREDICTION; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCROTUM DISORDER; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; TESTIS CANCER; UROGENITAL SYSTEM EXAMINATION; UROLOGIC SURGERY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; ENGLAND; FAMILY PRACTICE; GENITAL DISEASES, MALE; HEALTH PRIORITIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; SCROTUM; TESTICULAR NEOPLASMS;

EID: 33746089915     PISSN: 00358843     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1308/003588406X106540     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Department of Health. Referral Guidelines for Suspected Cancer. London, DH, 1999.
2. Clinical Oncology 2000 (©Royal College of Radiologists). Clinical Oncology Information Network Guidelines on the Management of Testicular Cancer.
3. Department of Health. NHS Cancer Plan. London, DH, 2000
4. Department of Health. The Cancer Services Collaborative 12 months on. London, DH, 2000
5. Khawaja AR, Allan SM. Has the breast cancer 'two week wait' guarantee for assessment made any difference? Eur J Surg Oncol 2000; 26: 536-9.
6. Department of Health. NHS Cancer Plan. London, DH, 2000; 48.
7. Thomas S, Burnet N. Two week rule for cancer referrals. Reducing waiting times from diagnosis to treatment might be more effective. BMJ 2001; 323: 864.
8. Department of Health Modernisation Agency Document. Ten High Impact Changes. London, DH.
9. Martin JP, Gabe SM, Pitcher MC, Jacyna MR. Referral patterns to a district general hospital gastroenterology outpatient clinic: implications for the 'two-week target'. Int J Clin Pract 2002; 56: 26-8.
10. Debnath D, Dielehner N, Gunning KA. Guidelines, compliance, and effectiveness: a 12 months' audit in an acute district general healthcare trust on the two week rule for suspected colorectal cancer. Postgrad Med J 2002; 78: 748-51.
11. Department of Health. Referral Guidelines for Suspected Cancer. London, DH, 2000.
12. Moore RA. Topping A. Young men's knowledge of testicular cancer and testicular self-examination: a lost opportunity? Eur J Cancer Care 1999; 8: 137-42.
13. Kromann-Andersen B, Hansen LB, Larsen PN, Lawetz K, Lynge P, Lysen D et al. Clinical versus ultrasonographic evaluation of scrotal disorders. Br J Urol 1988; 61: 350-3.
14. Sauven P. Two week rule for cancer referrals. Specialists, not GPs, may be best qualified to assess urgency. BMJ 2001; 323: 864-5.
15. Jones R, Rubin G, Hungin P. Is the two week rule for cancer referrals working? BMJ 2001; 322: 1555-6.
16. Oliver MD. Two week rule for cancer referrals. All stages of care pathway need speeding up. BMJ 2001; 323: 864.
17. Riesewyk C, Hayward C, Enser V, Northover J. Referral and diagnostic process in suspected colorectal cancer needs to be improved to achieve two week target. BMJ 2000; 321: 1527.