Dataset Information

Skin cancer concerns and genetic risk information-seeking in primary care.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Genomic testing for common genetic variants associated with skin cancer risk could enable personalized risk feedback to motivate skin cancer screening and sun protection. METHODS:In a cross-sectional study, we investigated whether skin cancer cognitions and behavioral factors, sociodemographics, family factors, and health information-seeking were related to perceived importance of learning about how (a) genes and (b) health habits affect personal health risks using classification and regression trees (CART). RESULTS:The sample (n = 1,772) was collected in a large health maintenance organization as part of the Multiplex Initiative, ranged in age from 25-40, was 53% female, 41% Caucasian, and 59% African-American. Most reported that they placed somewhat to very high importance on learning about how genes (79%) and health habits (88%) affect their health risks. Social influence actors were associated with information-seeking about genes and health habits. Awareness of family history was associated with importance of health habit, but not genetic, information-seeking. CONCLUSIONS:The investment of family and friends in health promotion may be a primary motivator for prioritizing information-seeking about how genes and health habits affect personal health risks and may contribute to the personal value, or personal utility, of risk information. Individuals who seek such risk information may be receptive to interventions aimed to maximize the social implications of healthy lifestyle change to reduce their health risks.

SUBMITTER: Hay J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3318939 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:NICE guidelines for the management of emotional concerns in primary care emphasise the importance of communication and a trusting relationship, which is difficult to operationalise in practice. Current pressures in the NHS mean that it is important to understand care from a patient perspective. This study aimed to explore patients' experiences of primary care consultations for emotional concerns and what patients valued when seeking care from their GP. METHODS:Eighteen adults with experience of consulting a GP for emotional concerns participated in 4 focus groups. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS:(1) Doctor as Drug: Patients' relationship with their GP was considered therapeutic with continuity particularly valued. (2) Doctor as Detective and Validator: Patients were often puzzled by their symptoms, not recognising their emotional concerns. GPs needed to play the role of detective by exploring not just symptoms, but the person and their life circumstances. GPs were crucial in helping patients understand and validate their emotional concerns. (3) Doctor as Collaborator: Patients prefer a collaborative partnership, but often need to relinquish involvement because they are too unwell, or take a more active role because they feel GPs are ill-equipped or under too much pressure to help. Patients valued: GPs booking their follow up appointments; acknowledgement of stressful life circumstances; not relying solely on medication. CONCLUSIONS:Seeking help for emotional concerns is challenging due to stigma and unfamiliar symptoms. GPs can support disclosure and understanding of emotional concerns by fully exploring and validating patients' concerns, taking into account patients' life contexts. This process of exploration and validation forms the foundation of a curative, trusting GP-patient relationship. A trusting relationship, with an emphasis on empathy and understanding, can make patients more able to share involvement in their care with GPs. This process is cyclical, as patients feel that their GP is caring, interested, and treating them as a person, further strengthening their relationship. NICE guidance should acknowledge the importance of empathy and validation when building an effective GP-patient partnership, and the role this has in supporting patients' involvement in their care.

Project description:BackgroundRising healthcare expenditures places the potential for substitution of hospital care towards primary care high on the political agenda. As low-risk basal cell carcinoma (BCC) care is one of the potential targets for substitution of hospital care towards primary care the objective of this study is to gain insight in the views of healthcare professionals regarding substitution of skin cancer care, and to identify perceived barriers and potential strategies to facilitate substitution.MethodsA qualitative study was conducted consisting of 40 interviews with dermatologists and GPs and three focus groups with 18 selected GPs with noted willingness regarding substitution of skin cancer care. The interviews and focus groups focused on general views, perceived barriers and potential strategies to facilitate substitution of skin cancer care, using predefined topic lists. All sessions were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using the program AtlasTi.ResultsGPs were generally positive regarding substitution of skin care whereas dermatologists expressed more concerns. Lack of trust in GPs to adequately perform skin cancer care and a preference of patients for dermatologists are reported as barriers by dermatologists. The main barriers reported by GPs were a lack of confidence in own skills to perform skin cancer care, a lack of trust from both patients and dermatologists and limited time and financial compensation. Facilitating strategies suggested by both groups mainly focused on improving GPs' education and improving the collaboration between primary and secondary care. GPs additionally suggested efforts from dermatologists to increase their own and patients' trust in GPs, and time and financial compensation. The selected group of GPs suggested practical solutions to facilitate substitution focusing on changes in organizational structure including horizontal referring, outreach models and practice size reduction.ConclusionsGPs and, to lesser extent, dermatologists are positive regarding substitution of low-risk BCC care, though report substantial barriers that need to be addressed before substitution can be further implemented. Aside from essential strategies such as improving GPs' skin cancer education and time and financial compensation, rearranging the organizational structure in primary care and between primary and secondary care may facilitate effective and safe substitution of low-risk BCC care.

Dataset Information

Skin cancer concerns and genetic risk information-seeking in primary care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets