Optimising the delivery of breast cancer risk assessment for women aged 30-39 years: A qualitative study of women's views

被引:3
作者
Hindmarch, Sarah [1 ,4 ]
Gorman, Louise [2 ]
Hawkes, Rhiannon E. [1 ]
Howell, Sacha J. [3 ]
French, David P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Manchester, Fac Biol Med & Hlth, Manchester Ctr Hlth Psychol, Sch Hlth Sci,Div Psychol & Mental Hlth, Manchester, England
[2] Univ Manchester, NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translat R, Manchester Acad Hlth Sci Ctr, Manchester, England
[3] Univ Manchester, Fac Biol Med & Hlth, Manchester Acad Hlth Sci Ctr, Div Canc Sci, Manchester, England
[4] Univ Manchester, Fac Biol Med & Hlth, Manchester Ctr Hlth Psychol, Sch Hlth Sci,Div Psychol & Mental Hlth, Manchester M13 9PL, England
关键词
acceptability; breast cancer; qualitative research; risk assessment; risk communication; PREVENTION; TRENDS;
D O I
10.1177/17455057231160348
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Background:Identifying women aged 30-39 years at increased risk of developing breast cancer could allow them to consider screening and preventive strategies. Research is underway to determine the feasibility of offering breast cancer risk assessment to this age group. However, it is unclear how best to deliver and communicate risk estimates to these women, in order to avoid potential harms such as undue anxiety and increase benefits such as informed decision-making. Objectives:This study aimed to investigate women's views on, and requirements for, this proposed novel approach to risk assessment. Design:A cross-sectional qualitative design was used. Methods:Thirty-seven women aged 30-39 years with no family history or personal history of breast cancer participated in seven focus groups (n = 29) and eight individual interviews. Data were analysed thematically using a framework approach. Results:Four themes were developed. Acceptability of risk assessment service concerns the positive views women have towards the prospect of participating in breast cancer risk assessment. Promoting engagement with the service describes the difficulties women in this age group experience in relation to healthcare access, including mental load and a lack of cultural awareness, and the implications of this for service design and delivery. Impact of receiving risk results focuses on the anticipated impacts of receiving different risk outcomes, namely, complacency towards breast awareness behaviours following low-risk results, an absence of reassurance following average-risk results and anxiety for high-risk results. Women's information requirements highlights women's desire to be fully informed at invite including understanding why the service is needed. In addition, women wanted risk feedback to focus on plans for management. Conclusion:The idea of breast cancer risk assessment was received favourably among this age group, providing that a risk management plan and support from healthcare professionals is available. Determinants of acceptability of a new service included minimising effort required to engage with service, co-development of invitation and risk feedback materials and the importance of educational campaigning about the potential benefits of participation in risk assessment.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 47 条
  • [1] Considerations for employing intersectionality in qualitative health research
    Abrams, Jasmine A.
    Tabaac, Ariella
    Jung, Sarah
    Else-Quest, Nicole M.
    [J]. SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2020, 258
  • [2] Targeted Therapy for Premenopausal Women with HR+, HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer: Focus on Special Considerations and Latest Advances
    Bardia, Aditya
    Hurvitz, Sara
    [J]. CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH, 2018, 24 (21) : 5206 - 5218
  • [3] Are community-based health worker interventions an effective approach for early diagnosis of cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Bellhouse, Sarah
    McWilliams, Lorna
    Firth, Joseph
    Yorke, Janelle
    French, David P.
    [J]. PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY, 2018, 27 (04) : 1089 - 1099
  • [4] The balance sheet of benefits and harms of breast cancer population-based screening in Europe: outcome research, practice and future challenges
    Broeders, Mireille
    Paci, Eugenio
    [J]. WOMENS HEALTH, 2015, 11 (06) : 883 - 890
  • [5] Collier A., 1994, Critical realism: An introduction to the philosophy of Roy Bhaskar
  • [6] Ethnicity and outcome of young breast cancer patients in the United Kingdom: the POSH study
    Copson, E.
    Maishman, T.
    Gerty, S.
    Eccles, B.
    Stanton, L.
    Cutress, R. I.
    Altman, D. G.
    Durcan, L.
    Simmonds, P.
    Jones, L.
    Tapper, W.
    Eccles, Diana
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2014, 110 (01) : 230 - 241
  • [7] Germline BRCA mutation and outcome in young-onset breast cancer (POSH): a prospective cohort study
    Copson, Ellen R.
    Maishman, Tom C.
    Tapper, Will J.
    Cutress, Ramsey I.
    Greville-Heygate, Stephanie
    Altman, Douglas G.
    Eccles, Bryony
    Gerty, Sue
    Durcan, Lorraine T.
    Jones, Louise
    Evans, D. Gareth
    Thompson, Alastair M.
    Pharoah, Paul
    Easton, Douglas F.
    Dunning, Alison M.
    Hanby, Andrew
    Lakhani, Sunil
    Eeles, Ros
    Gilbert, Fiona J.
    Hamed, Hisham
    Hodgson, Shirley
    Simmonds, Peter
    Stanton, Louise
    Ecclest, Diana M.
    [J]. LANCET ONCOLOGY, 2018, 19 (02) : 169 - 180
  • [8] The mental load: building a deeper theoretical understanding of how cognitive and emotional labor overload women and mothers
    Dean, Liz
    Churchill, Brendan
    Ruppanner, Leah
    [J]. COMMUNITY WORK & FAMILY, 2022, 25 (01) : 13 - 29
  • [9] Delaloge S., MY PERSONAL BREAST S
  • [10] Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Using Clinical Models and 77 Independent Risk-Associated SNPs for Women Aged Under 50 Years: Australian Breast Cancer Family Registry
    Dite, Gillian S.
    MacInnis, Robert J.
    Bickerstaffe, Adrian
    Dowty, James G.
    Allman, Richard
    Apicella, Carmel
    Milne, Roger L.
    Tsimiklis, Helen
    Phillips, Kelly-Anne
    Giles, Graham G.
    Terry, Mary Beth
    Southey, Melissa C.
    Hopper, John L.
    [J]. CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION, 2016, 25 (02) : 359 - 365