Cancer waiting times standards in Scotland: clinical review

Appendix B: Data collection template

Resource

There are concerns about the level of resource required at NHS Board level to track and record CWT data and whether existing collection methods are optimal.

How long is spent on average each month on collecting this data (in hours)?

Answer:

How many and what type of people ( e.g. tracker , audit , MDT) does this process involve? Please indicate AFC banding where possible.

Answer:

Please detail any examples you have of permanent or flexible re-allocation of your tracking resource which has helped ensure CWT data collection.

Answer:

In your Board, has the level of resource allocated to support CWT data collection changed since the standards were introduced in 2012? If so, in what way?

Answer:

Triage

Variance in allocation of USC flag to referrals from primary care and in subsequent clinical triage of these in secondary care was reported by steering group . We are keen to understand this position. Please provide examples of vetting USC referral experiences, is there a triage protocol , are some retuned to GP or re-graded?

We are looking to obtain examples across different tumour types. Please provide details of numbers of USC referrals and conversion rates for each tumour type for the last three months (if available).

Answer:

Timed pathways

We would like to obtain examples of timed pathways which have changed since 2012. Please provide examples (minimum two pathways) of 2012 and present day pathway.

Answer:

Diagnostics

In several tumour types a USC referral will require imaging or scoping to reach a diagnosis. The extent of this was raised as a possible pressure by the steering group. We would like to obtain data around the number of USC requests for scope and imaging across different pathways to look at any variance. Please provide any detail below.

Answer:

High risk patients

It is felt that current arrangements put some higher risk groups at a disadvantage, such as those with a strong family history of cancer, those under regular surveillance, those due repeat investigations, and those patients with significant but non-malignant conditions. This seems a particular issue in gastroenterology (Upper GI and colorectal services) gynaecology and breast.

Approximately how many people are considered to be under regular surveillance in your service at present in any/ all the above tumour types?

Answer:

What are current waiting times like for these patients?

Answer:

What 'safety netting' is in place for these patients to avoid them being lost to follow up or unduly delayed?

Answer:

Many thanks for completing, please return this to cancerdeliveryteam@gov.scot before 26 May 2017 .