Dataset Information

"Whilst you are here…" Acceptability of providing advice about screening and early detection of other cancers as part of the breast cancer screening programme.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

This research aimed to assess women's willingness to receive advice about cervical and bowel cancer screening participation and advice on cancer symptom awareness when attending breast cancer screening.

Methods

Women (n = 322) aged 60-64 years, living in the United Kingdom, who had previously taken part in breast cancer screening were recruited via a market research panel. They completed an online survey assessing willingness to receive advice, the potential impact of advice on breast screening participation, prospective acceptability and preferences for mode and timing of advice.

Results

Most women would be willing to receive information about cervical (86%) and bowel cancer screening (90%) and early symptoms of other cancers (92%) at a breast cancer screening appointment. Those who were not up to date with cervical cancer screening were less willing. Prospective acceptability was high for all three forms of advice and was associated with willingness to receive advice. Women would prefer to receive advice through a leaflet (41%) or discussion with the mammographer (30%) either before the appointment (27%), at the appointment (44%) or with their results (22%).

Conclusions

While there is high willingness and high acceptability towards using breast cancer screening as a teachable moment for advice about prevention and early detection of other cancers, some women find it unacceptable and this may reduce their likelihood of attending a breast screening appointment.

Patient or public contribution

This study focused on gaining women's insights into potential future initiatives to encourage screening and early diagnosis of cancer. Members of the public were also involved in piloting the questionnaire.

SUBMITTER: Scott SE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8483189 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:This study aimed to better understand patient and caregiver perspectives on social risk screening across different healthcare settings. METHODS:As part of a mixed-methods multisite study, the authors conducted semistructured interviews with a subset of adult patients and adult caregivers of pediatric patients who had completed the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation Accountable Health Communities social risk screening tool between July 2018 and February 2019. Interviews, conducted in English or Spanish, asked about reactions to screening, screening acceptability, preferences for administration, prior screening experiences that informed perspectives, and expectations for social assistance. Basic thematic analysis and constant comparative methods were used to code and develop themes. RESULTS:Fifty interviews were conducted across 10 study sites in 9 states, including 6 primary care clinics and 4 emergency departments. There was broad consensus among interviewees across all sites that social risk screening was acceptable. The following 4 main themes emerged: (1) participants believed screening for social risks is important; (2) participants expressed insight into the connections between social risks and overall health; (3) participants emphasized the importance of patient-centered implementation of social risk screening; and (4) participants recognized limits to the healthcare sector's capacity to address or resolve social risks. CONCLUSIONS:Despite gaps in the availability of social risk-related interventions in healthcare settings, patient-centered social risk screening, including empathy and attention to privacy, may strengthen relationships between patients and healthcare teams. SUPPLEMENT INFORMATION:This article is part of a supplement entitled Identifying and Intervening on Social Needs in Clinical Settings: Evidence and Evidence Gaps, which is sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Kaiser Permanente, and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Despite recent growth in healthcare delivery-based social risk screening, little is known about patient perspectives on these activities. This study evaluates patient and caregiver acceptability of social risk screening. METHODS:This was a cross-sectional survey of 969 adult patients and adult caregivers of pediatric patients recruited from 6 primary care clinics and 4 emergency departments across 9 states. Survey items included the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation Accountable Health Communities' social risk screening tool and questions about appropriateness of screening and comfort with including social risk data in electronic health records. Logistic regressions evaluated covariate associations with acceptability measures. Data collection occurred from July 2018 to February 2019; data analyses were conducted in February‒March 2019. RESULTS:Screening was reported as appropriate by 79% of participants; 65% reported comfort including social risks in electronic health records. In adjusted models, higher perceived screening appropriateness was associated with previous exposure to healthcare-based social risk screening (AOR=1.82, 95% CI=1.16, 2.88), trust in clinicians (AOR=1.55, 95% CI=1.00, 2.40), and recruitment from a primary care setting (AOR=1.70, 95% CI=1.23, 2.38). Lower appropriateness was associated with previous experience of healthcare discrimination (AOR=0.66, 95% CI=0.45, 0.95). Higher comfort with electronic health record documentation was associated with previously receiving assistance with social risks in a healthcare setting (AOR=1.47, 95% CI=1.04, 2.07). CONCLUSIONS:A strong majority of adult patients and caregivers of pediatric patients reported that social risk screening was appropriate. Most also felt comfortable including social risk data in electronic health records. Although multiple factors influenced acceptability, the effects were moderate to small. These findings suggest that lack of patient acceptability is unlikely to be a major implementation barrier. SUPPLEMENT INFORMATION:This article is part of a supplement entitled Identifying and Intervening on Social Needs in Clinical Settings: Evidence and Evidence Gaps, which is sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Kaiser Permanente, and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Project description:AimTo evaluate the potential of an integrated virtual medical retina clinic in secondary care for diabetic patients screened and referred by the UK National Diabetic Eye Screening Program (DESP).MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included diabetic patients referred by the DESP to either a virtual or a traditional doctor's appointment (face-to-face, F2F) at the Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (London, UK) between January 2015 and December 2018. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients that qualified for a virtual-clinic appointment according to hospital guidance. Secondary outcomes included the rate of attendance, mean time from DESP referral to initial hospital appointment, mean time-to-discharge and -to-treatment of either panretinal photocoagulation or intravitreal injection of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor.ResultsWe included 12,563 patients in this study. While 8833 patients (70.7%) would have qualified for a virtual appointment according to local triage guidance, only 2306 (18.4%) were referred to a virtual consultation due to capacity constraints. For routine referrals, mean time to the first hospital appointment was 66.9 days with a standard deviation of ±35.9 and 80.9 ± 44.4 days for a virtual and a F2F consultation, respectively. The mean time from referral to discharge to community was 71.7 ± 30.8 and 86.3 ± 37.0 days for a virtual and a F2F consultation, respectively. We did not observe a statistically significant difference in the mean time-to-treatment in the sub-cohort that required intravitreal therapy for maculopathy (virtual clinics: 220.7 ± 84.8; F2F: 178.0 days ± 80.7; p value > 0.05). Moreover, we observed a non-inferior attendance rate in virtual as compared to F2F clinics.ConclusionA significant proportion of diabetic patients referred to a F2F clinic could initially be managed in a virtual clinic. Increasing the adoption of virtual clinics in the management of diabetic patients that do not need long-term management or monitoring in secondary services may help alleviate service demands without diminishing quality of clinical care. Collectively, our analyses suggest that virtual consultations are a faster and clinically appropriate alternative for a substantial proportion of diabetic patients.

Project description:ObjectiveCommunication during consultations between referring and consultant physicians is often cited as a source of adverse events, medical error and professional incivility. While existing literature focuses on the role of referring physicians, few studies acknowledge the role of consultant physicians in enhancing communication during consultations. This scoping review aims to identify and synthesise available recommendations to enhance the communication practices of consultants during real-time consultations.DesignA scoping review was conducted and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews.Data sourcesMedline, EMBASE and PsycINFO databases were searched from inception to August 2022.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesEnglish-language publications which describe recommendations, strategies or frameworks to improve the communication practices of consultant physicians during real-time consultations with referring physicians.Data extraction and synthesisThe search strategy included the following concepts: consultation, physician, communication, interprofessional relations and best practice. Two authors independently performed each phase of title and abstract screening, full-text review and data extraction. Discrepancies were resolved by a third author. Extracted data were iteratively analysed and summarised thematically.ResultsSixteen publications met the inclusion criteria. Synthesis of available recommendations identified organisation, expertise and interpersonal skills as three overarching and interconnected dimensions of communication demonstrated by consultants during effective consultations. Twelve studies identified interpersonal skills as being critical in alleviating the widespread professional incivility that is reported during consultations. Existing recommendations to improve the communication practices of consultants are limited as they lack standardised interventions and fail to comprehensively address all three elements identified in this review.ConclusionThis scoping review synthesises available recommendations to improve the communication practices of consultant physicians during real-time consultations. An opportunity exists to develop communication tools or educational interventions based on the findings of this review to enhance interphysician consultation encounters.

Project description:BackgroundSurvival of childhood, adolescent and young adult (CAYA) cancers has increased with progress in the management of the treatments and has reached more than 80% at 5 years. Nevertheless, these survivors are at great risk of second cancers and non-malignant co-morbidities in later life. DeNaCaPST is a non-interventional study whose aim is to organize a national screening for thyroid cancer and breast cancer in survivors of CAYA cancers. It will study the compliance with international recommendations, with the aim, regarding a breast screening programme, of offering for every woman living in France, at equal risk, an equal screening.MethodDeNaCaPST trial is coordinated by the INSERM 1018 unit in cooperation with the LEA (French Childhood Cancer Survivor Study for Leukaemia) study's coordinators, the long term follow up committee and the paediatric radiation committee of the SFCE (French Society of Childhood Cancers). A total of 35 centres spread across metropolitan France and la Reunion will participate. FCCSS (French Childhood Cancer Survivor Study), LEA and central registry will be interrogated to identify eligible patients. To participate, centers agreed to perform a complete "long-term follow-up consultations" according to good clinical practice and the guidelines of the SFCE (French Society of Children Cancers).DiscussionAs survival has greatly improved in childhood cancers, detection of therapy-related malignancies has become a priority even if new radiation techniques will lead to better protection for organs at risk. International guidelines have been put in place because of the evidence for increased lifetime risk of breast and thyroid cancer. DeNaCaPST is based on these international recommendations but it is important to recognize that they are based on expert consensus opinion and are supported by neither nonrandomized observational studies nor prospective randomized trials in this specific population. Over-diagnosis is a phenomenon inherent in any screening program and therefore such programs must be evaluated.