Public and Healthcare Professional Attitudes Towards Risk-Stratified Bowel Screening: A Qualitative Study Using an Info-Comic Book

被引:0
作者
Miles, Hannah [1 ]
Macleod, Una [1 ]
Weller, David [2 ]
Cairns, Joanne [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hull, Hull York Med Sch, Kingston Upon Hull, England
[2] Univ Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland
关键词
acceptability; bowel cancer; bowel screening; colorectal cancer; info-comic book; qualitative; risk stratification; visual methods;
D O I
10.1111/hex.70315
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundScreening for bowel cancer (colorectal cancer, CRC) is well established in many high-income countries. There has been considerable interest in moving towards risk-based bowel screening to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of screening. This UK-based qualitative study explored public and healthcare professionals (HCPs)' attitudes towards risk-based bowel screening.MethodsFive virtual focus groups were held with members of the public of bowel screening age (60-74 in England; 50-74 in Scotland) and HCPs to explore attitudes towards risk-based bowel screening. Public participants (n = 12) were invited through our existing patient and public involvement (PPI) networks. HCPs (n = 11) were recruited through existing networks and with the support of screening hubs. A co-created info-comic book was used to facilitate discussion on bowel cancer risk factors. Following transcription, qualitative data were analysed thematically.MethodsFive virtual focus groups were held with members of the public of bowel screening age (60-74 in England; 50-74 in Scotland) and HCPs to explore attitudes towards risk-based bowel screening. Public participants (n = 12) were invited through our existing patient and public involvement (PPI) networks. HCPs (n = 11) were recruited through existing networks and with the support of screening hubs. A co-created info-comic book was used to facilitate discussion on bowel cancer risk factors. Following transcription, qualitative data were analysed thematically.ResultsThere was consensus that more intense screening for those of higher risk is acceptable, but this should not imply less screening for those of lower risk. There was some agreement between the public and HCPs over concerns with undue focus on risk factors, which could disadvantage those with minimal risk factors. There was also a desire to streamline existing bowel screening across the UK nations. It was felt that the current screening programme, by treating people with all risk levels in the same way, is equitable-so clear communication is needed if this is to be changed.ConclusionFindings indicate a preference that any changes to the bowel screening programme should enhance the current screening offer, and not compromise screening offered to individuals deemed to be low risk. Changes need to be acceptable to the public and HCPs-if unacceptable, there is a risk of lowering bowel screening uptake, which could potentially exacerbate health inequities in screening outcomes.Patient and Public ContributionThe info-comic book was co-created with two PPI networks, INVOLVE Hull and People and Research Together, Bowel Research UK, supported by Humber All Nations Alliance. The PPI network provided invaluable feedback on the development of the info-comic book, to ensure inclusivity and avoid the reproduction of dominant stereotypes associated with bowel cancer.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]   Personalised and risk based cancer screening [J].
Autier, Philippe .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2019, 367
[2]  
Bowel Cancer, Beating Bowel Cancer Together. About Bowel Cancer
[3]  
Braun V., 2006, Qual Res Psychol, V3, P77, DOI DOI 10.1191/1478088706QP063OA
[4]   Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing researcher [J].
Braun, Virginia ;
Clarke, Victoria .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TRANSGENDER HEALTH, 2023, 24 (01) :1-6
[5]   Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis [J].
Braun, Virginia ;
Clarke, Victoria .
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IN SPORT EXERCISE AND HEALTH, 2019, 11 (04) :589-597
[6]   A scoping review of risk-stratified bowel screening: current evidence, future directions [J].
Cairns, J. M. ;
Greenley, S. ;
Bamidele, O. ;
Weller, D. .
CANCER CAUSES & CONTROL, 2022, 33 (05) :653-685
[7]  
Cairns Joanne Marie, 2023, Res Involv Engagem, V9, P28, DOI [10.1186/s40900-023-00437-2, 10.1186/s40900-023-00437-2]
[8]   Are there ethnic and religious variations in uptake of bowel cancer screening? A retrospective cohort study among 1.7 million people in Scotland [J].
Campbell, Christine ;
Douglas, Anne ;
Williams, Linda ;
Cezard, Genevieve ;
Brewster, David H. ;
Buchanan, Duncan ;
Robb, Kathryn ;
Stanners, Greig ;
Weller, David ;
Steele, Robert J. C. ;
Steiner, Markus ;
Bhopal, Raj .
BMJ OPEN, 2020, 10 (10)
[9]  
Cancer Research, Survival for Bowel Cancer
[10]   Inequalityinuptakeofbowelcancerscreeningbydeprivation, ethnicityandsmokingstatus:cross-sectionalstudyin86850citizens [J].
Creavin, Alexandra ;
Creavin, Sam ;
Kenward, Charlie ;
Sterne, Jonathan ;
Williams, Jo .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2023, 45 (04) :904-911