Reasons for intending to accept or decline kidney cancer screening: thematic analysis of free text from an online survey

被引:2
作者
Freer-Smith, Charlotte [1 ]
Harvey-Kelly, Laragh [1 ]
Mills, Katie [2 ]
Harrison, Hannah [2 ]
Rossi, Sabrina H. [3 ]
Griffin, Simon J. [2 ]
Stewart, Grant D. [4 ]
Usher-Smith, Juliet A. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Cambridge, Sch Clin Med, Cambridge, England
[2] Univ Cambridge, Primary Care Unit, Dept Publ Hlth & Primary Care, Cambridge, England
[3] Univ Cambridge, Dept Oncol, Cambridge, Cambs, England
[4] Univ Cambridge, Dept Surg, Cambridge, England
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2021年 / 11卷 / 05期
关键词
kidney tumours; preventive medicine; public health; qualitative research; PARTICIPATION; DECISION; UK;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044961
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
ObjectivesKidney cancer has been identified as a disease for which screening might provide significant benefit for patients. The aim of this study was to understand in detail the facilitators and barriers towards uptake of a future kidney cancer screening programme, and to compare these across four proposed screening modalities.DesignAn online survey including free-text responses.SettingUKParticipants668 adultsPrimary and secondary outcome measuresThe survey assessed participants' self-reported intention to take-up kidney cancer screening with four different test methods (urine test, blood test, ultrasound scan and low-dose CT). We conducted thematic analysis of 2559 free-text comments made within the survey using an inductive approach.ResultsWe identified five overarching themes that influenced screening intention: 'personal health beliefs', 'practicalities', 'opinions of the test', 'attitudes towards screening' and 'cancer apprehension'. Overall, participants considered the tests presented as simple to complete and the benefits of early detection to outweigh any drawbacks to screening. Dominant facilitators and barriers varied with patterns of intention to take up screening across the four tests. Most intended to take up screening by all four tests, and for these participants, screening was seen as a positive health behaviour. A significant minority were driven by practicalities and the risks of the tests offered. A smaller proportion intended to reject all forms of screening offered, often due to fear or worry about results and unnecessary medical intervention or a general negative view of screening.ConclusionsMost individuals would accept kidney cancer screening by any of the four test options presented because of strong positive attitudes towards screening in general and the perceived simplicity of the tests. Providing information about the rationale for screening in general and the potential benefits of early detection will be important to optimise uptake among uncertain individuals.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 32 条
  • [1] Women's responses to changes in US preventive task force's mammography screening guidelines: results of focus groups with ethnically diverse women
    Allen, Jennifer D.
    Bluethmann, Shirley Morrison
    Sheets, Margaret
    Opdyke, Kelly Morrison
    Gates-Ferris, Kathryn
    Hurlbert, Marc
    Harden, Elizabeth
    [J]. BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 2013, 13
  • [2] Obstacles to colorectal screening in general practice: a qualitative study of GPs and patients
    Aubin-Auger, Isabelle
    Mercier, Alain
    Lebeau, Jean-Pierre
    Baumann, Laurence
    Peremans, Lieve
    Van Royen, Paul
    [J]. FAMILY PRACTICE, 2011, 28 (06) : 670 - 676
  • [3] Cervical cancer screening and psychosocial barriers perceived by patients. A systematic review
    Bukowska-Durawa, Alicja
    Luszczynska, Aleksandra
    [J]. WSPOLCZESNA ONKOLOGIA-CONTEMPORARY ONCOLOGY, 2014, 18 (03): : 153 - 159
  • [4] Cancer research UK, 2009, PUBL AW CANC BRIT RE
  • [5] Edgar Lynne, 2013, Br J Nurs, V22, P1021
  • [6] Differences in cancer awareness and beliefs between Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK (the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership): do they contribute to differences in cancer survival?
    Forbes, L. J. L.
    Simon, A. E.
    Warburton, F.
    Boniface, D.
    Brain, K. E.
    Dessaix, A.
    Donnelly, C.
    Haynes, K.
    Hvidberg, L.
    Lagerlund, M.
    Lockwood, G.
    Tishelman, C.
    Vedsted, P.
    Vigmostad, M. N.
    Ramirez, A. J.
    Wardle, J.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2013, 108 (02) : 292 - 300
  • [7] Gender Differences in Vote Choice: Social Cues and Social Harmony as Heuristics
    Harteveld, Eelco
    Dahlberg, Stefan
    Kokkonen, Andrej
    Van der Brug, Wouter
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2019, 49 (03) : 1141 - 1161
  • [8] Harvey-Kelly LLW., 2020, BMC UROL, P1
  • [9] Health and Social Care Information Centre, BREAST SCREEN PROGR
  • [10] Health and Social Care Information Centre, CERV SCREEN PROGR EN