Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The Teesside Cancer Family History Service: change management and innovation at cancer network level

  • Published:
Familial Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Teesside project took the underlying principle of the Kenilworth model–that people with a family history of cancer should be ‘triaged’ and signposted to appropriate clinical services–and applied it to a whole clinical cancer network in which inequity was the major driver for change. Unlike the Kenilworth model, the Department of Health/Macmillan Cancer Support-funded pilot project in Teesside embedded genetic risk assessment at secondary care level. The project took a ‘bottom up’ approach that engaged a wide variety of stakeholder groups and identified key challenges that formed the basis of a clear strategic plan. A number of specialist cancer nurses across the network had independently developed risk assessment roles over preceding years: these roles needed to be redefined prior to the creation of a small team of genetic risk assessment practitioners (‘GRAPs’). This innovation challenged existing nursing roles on a local and national level. In turn, however, we were able to introduce a simple, single network-wide referral pathway, reducing workload on both primary care and tumour-specific services; to adopt a standardised genetic risk assessment pathway; and to incorporate risk assessment as a key step in the decision to enrol an individual in a clinical screening programme. Collaborative audit proved to be a useful way of engaging stakeholders and holding their attention throughout the three-year project, proving the value of the project in their terms, and embedding the changes we had made. The keys to success in this project were inclusiveness, transparency and clear strategic management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. http://www.cancercarealliance.nhs.uk/

  2. Working Group for the Chief Medical Officer (1998) Genetics and Cancer Services. Report of a working group for the Chief Medical Officer, Department of Health. Department of Health, London

  3. Macmillan Cancer Support (2001) The ‘Kenilworth’ Service Delivery Model. Internal document produced by an expert working group convened by Macmillan Cancer Support and the Department of Health

  4. McIntosh A, Shaw C, Evans G, Turnbull N, Bahar N, Barclay M, Easton D, Emery J, Gray J, Halpin J, Hopwood P, McKay J, Sheppard C, Sibbering M, Watson W, Wailoo A, Hutchinson A (2004; updated 2006) Clinical Guidelines and Evidence Review for The Classification and Care of Women at Risk of Familial Breast Cancer, London: National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care/University of Sheffield. NICE guideline CG014. www.nice.org.uk

  5. Kirk M, McDonald K, Longley M, Anstey S (2003) Fit for Practice in the Genetics Era: A competence based education framework for nurses, midwives and health visitors. Report to the Department of Health NHS Genetics Team. University of Glamorgan, Pontypridd. Available at: http://www.geneticseducation.nhs.uk/learning/nursing.asp?id = 16

  6. Agenda for Change project team (2004) The NHS Knowledge and Skills Framework and the Development Review Process. Department of Health, Leeds

  7. McAllister M, O’Malley K, Hopwood P et al (2002) Management of women with a family history of breast cancer in the North West Region of England: training for implementing a vision of the future. J Med Genet 39:531–535

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Klein KJ, Sorra JS (1996) The challenge of innovation implementation. Acad Management Rev 21:1055–1080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lewin K (1958) Group decisions and social change. In: Maccoby E, Newcomb T, Hartley E (eds) Readings in social psychology. Rhinehart & Winston, New York

    Google Scholar 

  10. Watson E, Clements A, Lucassen A et al (2002) Education improves general practitioner (GP) management of familial breast/ovarian cancer: findings from a cluster randomized controlled trial. J Med Genet 39:779–781

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Brewster DH, Fordyce A, Black RJ (2004) Impact of a cancer registry-based genealogy service to support clinical genetics services. Fam Cancer 3:139–141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Reis MM, Young D, McLeish L et al (2006) Analysis of referrals to a multi-disciplinary breast cancer genetics clinic: practical and economic considerations. Fam Cancer 5:297–303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pichert G (2004) Harnessing the potential of cancer genetics in healthcare. Lan Oncol 5:626–632

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project was supported by Macmillan Cancer Support and the UK Government Department of Health. The authors wish to thank Wendy Chorley and Claire Shaw at Derby City General Hospital for initially demonstrating the success of this approach at NHS Trust level to PB; Liz Herring, CCA Service Improvement Lead for her considerable expertise and practical help throughout the project; network clinicians and nurses; the CCA Patient and Carer Group for their support and Margaret Wright in particular for many helpful contributions; and the individuals and families who took part in the project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Brennan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brennan, P., Claber, O. & Shaw, T. The Teesside Cancer Family History Service: change management and innovation at cancer network level. Familial Cancer 6, 181–187 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10689-007-9125-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10689-007-9125-0

Keywords

Navigation