Patient perspectives on information and choice in cancer screening: a qualitative study in the UK

Risk-Adapted Breast Screening for Women at Low Predicted Risk of Breast Cancer: An Online Discrete Choice Experiment

BACKGROUND

A risk-stratified breast screening program could offer low-risk women less screening than is currently offered by the National Health Service. The acceptability of this approach may be enhanced if it corresponds to UK women's screening preferences and values.

OBJECTIVES

To elicit and quantify preferences for low-risk screening options.

METHODS

Women aged 40 to 70 y with no history of breast cancer took part in an online discrete choice experiment. We generated 32 hypothetical low-risk screening programs defined by 5 attributes (start age, end age, screening interval, risk of dying from breast cancer, and risk of overdiagnosis), the levels of which were systematically varied between the programs. Respondents were presented with 8 choice sets and asked to choose between 2 screening alternatives or no screening. Preference data were analyzed using conditional logit regression models. The relative importance of attributes and the mean predicted probability of choosing each program were estimated.

RESULTS

Participants (N = 502) preferred all screening programs over no screening. An older starting age of screening, younger end age of screening, longer intervals between screening, and increased risk of dying had a negative impact on support for screening programs (P < 0.01). Although the risk of overdiagnosis was of low relative importance, a decreased risk of this harm had a small positive impact on screening choices. The mean predicted probabilities that risk-adapted screening programs would be supported relative to current guidelines were low (range, 0.18 to 0.52).

CONCLUSIONS

A deintensified screening pathway for women at low risk of breast cancer, especially one that recommends a later screening start age, would run counter to women's breast screening preferences. Further research is needed to enhance the acceptability of offering less screening to those at low risk of breast cancer.

HIGHLIGHTS

Risk-based breast screening may involve the deintensification of screening for women at low risk of breast cancer.Low-risk screening pathways run counter to women's screening preferences and values.Longer screening intervals may be preferable to a later start age.Work is needed to enhance the acceptability of a low-risk screening pathway.

The validity of instruments to measure knowledge in population-based cancer screening targeting individuals at average risk - A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Relevant knowledge is essential for informed choices about (non)participation in population-based cancer screening. Many instruments have been proposed to assess residents' knowledge about cancer screening programmes but their measurement properties are unknown. This systematic review aims to identify and critically evaluate the measurement properties of instruments to measure knowledge about cancer screening in individuals eligible for population-based screening.

METHODS

A literature search was undertaken in PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science in August 2023. The review included any study reporting one or more measurement properties of the questionnaire or sub-scale used measuring knowledge of cancer screening including breast, colorectal and/or cervical cancer screening. Studies including males aged 45 or older and females aged 20 or older were included. Two independent reviewers screened the articles and assessed the included articles using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN).

RESULTS

We included 24 instruments, which varied in number and characteristics of items. All instruments were assessed as having an inadequate instrument development. The results of structural validity, internal consistency, criterion validity and reliability were assessed as indeterminate, while construct validity and responsiveness were assessed as sufficient.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review identified no instruments to measure knowledge about cancer screening where the measurement properties were sufficiently evaluated. There is a lack of focus on content validity and structural validity, and further validation of the instruments is needed. The results indicate a lack of shared understanding or agreement of what constitutes relevant knowledge about cancer screening.

Contents analysis of thyroid cancer-related information uploaded to YouTube by physicians in Korea: endorsing thyroid cancer screening, potentially leading to overdiagnosis

BACKGROUND

Thyroid cancer overdiagnosis is a major public health issue in South Korea, which has the highest incidence rate. The accessibility of information through the Internet, particularly on YouTube, could potentially impact excessive screening. This study aimed to analyze the content of thyroid cancer-related YouTube videos, particularly those from 2016 onwards, to evaluate the potential spread of misinformation.

METHODS

A total of 326 videos for analysis were collected using a video search protocol with the keyword "thyroid cancer" on YouTube. This study classified the selected YouTube videos as either provided by medical professionals or not and used topic clustering with LDA (latent dirichlet allocation), sentiment analysis with KoBERT (Korean bidirectional encoder representations from transformers), and reliability evaluation to analyze the content. The proportion of mentions of poor prognosis for thyroid cancer and the categorization of advertising content was also analyzed.

RESULTS

Videos by medical professionals were categorized into 7 topics, with "Thyroid cancer is not a 'Good cancer'" being the most common. The number of videos opposing excessive thyroid cancer screening decreased gradually yearly. Videos advocating screening received more favorable comments from viewers than videos opposing excessive thyroid cancer screening. Patient experience videos were categorized into 6 topics, with the "Treatment process and after-treatment" being the most common.

CONCLUSION

This study found that a significant proportion of videos uploaded by medical professionals on thyroid cancer endorse the practice, potentially leading to excessive treatments. The study highlights the need for medical professionals to provide high-quality and unbiased information on social media platforms to prevent the spread of medical misinformation and the need for criteria to judge the content and quality of online health information.

Knowledge, Compliance, and Inequities in Colon Cancer Screening in Spain: An Exploratory Study

In Spain, inequities exist in implementing colorectal cancer (CRC) tests with the target population-adults aged 50 to 69-as part of population-based CRC screening programs. This research aims to further our understanding of the target population's awareness, attitudes, and perceptions of these test-based screening programs. A survey was carried out using an online panel representative of the target population, with a sample collected from 5313 individuals. Data collection took place in June 2022. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were carried out using contingency tables, the Chi-square test, and Cramer's V statistics. The sample was also segmented based on key variables. Finally, the results were analyzed using logistic regression. In the sample population, 62.5% had taken the fecal occult blood test (FOBT), 72.5% reported receiving the invitation letter to participate in the screening program, and 86.8% had prior knowledge of the FOBT. Noncompliance was mainly due to lack of symptoms (40%), non-receipt of invitation letters (39.7%), and forgetfulness or neglect (28.5%). On the contrary, receipt of the letter of invitation (OR 7.35, p < 0.01) and prior knowledge of FOBT (OR 6.32, p < 0.01) were the main variables that increased the probability of test uptake. Other significant variables included frequency of primary care visits (OR 1.71, p < 0.01) and being older (65-69 years old) (OR 1.52, p < 0.01) There is still a pressing need for greater awareness of both CRC risk factors and the benefits of early detection, as well as for overcoming the common misconception that detection should only be sought when symptoms are present.

Integration of art and technology in personalized radiation oncology care: Experiences, evidence, and perspectives

Cancer diagnoses expose patients to traumatic stress, sudden changes in daily life, changes in the body and autonomy, with even long-term consequences, and in some cases, to come to terms with the end-of-life. Furthermore, rising survival rates underline that the need for interventions for emotional wellbeing is in growing demand by patients and survivors. Cancer patients frequently have compliance problems, difficulties during treatment, stress, or challenges in implementing healthy behaviors. This scenario was highlighted during the COVID-19 emergency. These issues often do not reach the clinical attention of dedicated professionals and could also become a source of stress or burnout for professionals. So, these consequences are evident on individual, interpersonal, and health system levels. Oncology services have increasingly sought to provide value-based health care, considering resources invested, with implications for service delivery and related financing mechanisms. Value-based health care can improve patient outcomes, often revealed by patient outcome measures while seeking balance with economical budgets. The paper aims to show the Gemelli Advanced Radiation Therapy (ART) experience of personalizing the patients' care pathway through interventions based on technologies and art, the personalized approach to cancer patients and their role as "co-stars" in treatment care. The paper describes the vision, experiences, and evidence that have guided clinical choices involving patients and professionals in a co-constructed therapeutic pathway. We will explore this approach by describing: the various initiatives already implemented and prospects, with particular attention to the economic sustainability of the paths proposed to patients; the several pathways of personalized care, both from the patient's and healthcare professional perspective, that put the person's experience at the Gemelli ART Center. The patient's satisfaction with the treatment and economic outcomes have been considered. The experiences and future perspectives described in the manuscript will focus on the value of people's experiences and patient satisfaction indicators, patients, staff, and the healthcare organization.

Improving the uptake of cervical screening in pregnant and recently postnatal women: a quality improvement project

BACKGROUND

In 2018, cervical screening uptake was at its lowest level since screening began, particularly in those aged 25-35, coinciding with the peak incidence of cervical cancer and average age at first delivery.

PROBLEM

Retrospective baseline data of pregnant women found 47.3% (n=123/260) were overdue for screening by delivery, of whom 74% (n=91/123) remained overdue by 6 months postnatal.

METHODS

We undertook a quality improvement project from April 2018 to April 2019 to improve cervical screening uptake in pregnant and postnatal women. We mapped out the screening process and canvassed stakeholders. The main theme was inconsistency of advice received by women. From February 2018 to May 2020, we undertook a prospective audit of 10 women per week who gave birth in our maternity department, recording screening status at delivery and 6 months postnatal.Interventions included introducing evidence-based guidelines about cervical screening in pregnancy and the postnatal period, flow charts for maternity staff, multiprofessional teaching for all maternity staff and information dissemination to women (via the HANDiApp platform, a social media campaign and adapting results letters following colposcopy, highlighting dates when screening would be due). Primary care opening hours were extended for screening and women received a letter from their midwives, if they required cervical screening in pregnancy.

RESULTS

Locally, the percentage of women overdue for cervical screening by 6 months postnatal improved by 8.0% during this project, compared with a 1.6% change in national screening rates in women aged 25-49.

CONCLUSIONS

We increased the percentage of local pregnant and postnatal women attending cervical screening by introduction of a package of information, targeted education and widening access to screening appointments.

He Tapu Te Whare Tangata (sacred house of humanity): Under-screened Māori women talk about HPV self-testing cervical screening clinical pathways

OBJECTIVE

To develop an in-depth understanding of HPV self-testing cervical screening clinical pathways for never-/under-screened Māori women.

METHODS

Based on a community-based cluster randomized controlled trial in Aotearoa (New Zealand), a Kaupapa Māori (by Māori, for Māori) qualitative study enrolled Māori women who met the eligibility criteria of the HPV trial intervention (aged 25-69 years, no screen in >4 years). In total, 28 were recruited (22 had a negative test, six had a positive test and colposcopy). They were asked about their clinical pathway.

RESULTS

The HPV self-test was seen as empowering and promoting bodily autonomy, although some women expressed fears or misconceptions about this new technology. While those with a negative test were relieved, for the six women who had a positive test, there were many fears, compounded by seeking out information on the Internet. When attending colposcopy, the importance of support and responsive care was emphasized.

CONCLUSION

HPV self-testing has the potential to improve access to cervical screening and reduce inequities for Māori. Care must be taken in the delivery of screening and colposcopy results. Primary care and colposcopy services need to take special care with never-/under-screened Māori women to provide sensitive, responsive care, and mitigate trauma.

Autonomous and informed decision-making: The case of colorectal cancer screening

INTRODUCTION

It is increasingly considered important that people make an autonomous and informed decision concerning colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. However, the realisation of autonomy within the concept of informed decision-making might be interpreted too narrowly. Additionally, relatively little is known about what the eligible population believes to be a 'good' screening decision. Therefore, we aimed to explore how the concepts of autonomous and informed decision-making relate to how the eligible CRC screening population makes their decision and when they believe to have made a 'good' screening decision.

METHODS

We conducted 27 semi-structured interviews with the eligible CRC screening population (eighteen CRC screening participants and nine non-participants). The general topics discussed concerned how people made their CRC screening decision, how they experienced making this decision and when they considered they had made a 'good' decision.

RESULTS

Most interviewees viewed a 'good' CRC screening decision as one based on both reasoning and feeling/intuition, and that is made freely. However, many CRC screening non-participants experienced a certain social pressure to participate. All CRC screening non-participants viewed making an informed decision as essential. This appeared to be the case to a lesser extent for CRC screening participants. For most, experiences and values were involved in their decision-making.

CONCLUSION

Our sample of the eligible CRC screening population viewed aspects related to the concepts of autonomous and informed decision-making as important for making a 'good' CRC screening decision. However, in particular the existence of a social norm may be affecting a true autonomous decision-making process. Additionally, the present concept of informed decision-making with its strong emphasis on making a fully informed and well-considered decision does not appear to be entirely reflective of the process in practice. More efforts could be made to attune to the diverse values and factors that are involved in deciding about CRC screening participation.

Decision-making styles in the context of colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Our study examined the use of decision-making styles, as identified by Scott and Bruce (1995) (i.e. differentiating between a rational, intuitive, dependent, avoidant and spontaneous decision-making style), within the context of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening participation. In the field of cancer screening, informed decision-making is considered important, which follows the Rational Decision model. Subsequently, gaining more insight into decision-making styles being used in real life, could improve support to people when making their screening decision. In addition, we examined whether the decision-making style that people used was associated with their experienced decisional conflict.

METHODS

An online survey was carried out among a sample of first-time CRC screening invitees (1282 respondents, response rate 49%). We assessed people's decision-making styles, CRC screening participation, education level, self-reported health literacy, and decisional conflict, and examined the possible associations between them.

RESULTS

In our study, people who had to decide about CRC screening scored high on using both a rational and intuitive decision-making style. Respondents scoring higher on using a spontaneous or dependent decision-making style were more likely to have participated in CRC screening, while respondents scoring higher on using an avoidant decision-making style were more likely not to have participated in CRC screening. However, differences were small. Generally, people in our study experienced low decisional conflict.

CONCLUSION

Our eligible CRC screening population scored high on using both a rational and intuitive decision-making style. To optimise support to people, public education materials could be appealing more to the intuitive processes at hand. That being said, the current education materials aimed at informed/rational decision-making do not necessarily seem to create a problem, as people generally experienced low decisional conflict. Possible concerns regarding the use of a spontaneous, dependent or avoidant decision-making style could be that these styles might be contributing to less informed decisions. However, it is relevant to consider that the found differences are small and that any possible concern applies to a relatively small group of people.

HAPPY - Humanity Assurance Protocol in interventional radiotheraPY (brachytherapy) - an AIRO Interventional Radiotherapy Study Group project

Purpose

Interventional procedures may produce emotional distress, particularly in interventional radiotherapy (IRT, brachytherapy - BT). This work would like to propose a series of recommendations/interventions to guarantee a human approach in order to favor the psychological well-being of the patient during interventional radiotherapy.

Material and methods

Thirty patients affected by gynecological cancer and treated with endovaginal high-dose-rate IRT (HDR-IRT) were selected from January to March 2019. A specific Multiprofessional Task Group (MTG) was defined in order to analyze the needs of patients. Each component of the task group spoke with the patients to examine their needs and to investigate their fears and perception. The results of the MTG were subjected to evaluation by an Expert Team (ET) of 4 physicians from 4 different institutions for a final evaluation. Both teams discussed the patient's needs to generate a list of necessary interventions to fulfill every single need in order to obtain their inner well-being. Another team (Master Team - MT) performed an independent check.

Results

All patients suggest that the main issue is the "lack of information and fear of the unknown". The fear of feeling pain was a significant source of concern, sadness, and vulnerability for the majority of the patients (76.6%). All patients do not appreciate the use of the word "bunker" to describe the treatment place. In 33.3% of patients the word "brachytherapy" (often unknown) determines insecurity while the term "interventional radiotherapy" reassures. Ninety percent of patients preferred to perform the external genital depilation at home and 80% of them would like the bladder catheter to be placed immediately before the procedure. MTG and ET defined nine "HAPPY recommendations". The MT approved the protocol without changes.

Conclusions

The aim of the present paper was to produce a protocol consisting in intervention that could improve the internal serendipity and emotional state of patients who underwent HDR-IRT.

[Development of Decision Aids for Organized Cervical Carcinoma Screening in Germany]

AIM OF THE STUDY

The Federal Joint Committee has decided to introduce organized cervical carcinoma screening in 2020. The present work describes the development of decision aids that will be sent to women in this program.

METHODS

A systematic search for qualitative studies and surveys was conducted to gather information on experiences, attitudes and information needs. Furthermore, we searched for systematic reviews on advantages and disadvantages of screening. An existing decision analysis for cervical carcinoma screening in Germany was used. The designs were subjected to a qualitative test (focus groups with 26 women and 8 expert interviews), to a quantitative user test (online survey n=2,014 women) and to a public hearing.

RESULTS

Most women found the decision aids informative and helpful. The majority would recommend the use of these materials to others. For many women, part of the information was new, although they had been involved in cervical cancer screening for some time. The presentation of the advantages and disadvantages was judged to be balanced. However, 10% changed their attitude towards participation and 70% of women would attend screening.

CONCLUSION

The decision aids found a high acceptance among the users. They can help to reduce knowledge deficits on cervical carcinoma screening and support a informed decision making.

Expression III: patients' expectations and preferences regarding physician-patient relationship and clinical management-results of the international NOGGO/ENGOT-ov4-GCIG study in 1830 ovarian cancer patients from European countries

Backround

The primary aim of this study was to investigate information needs and treatment preferences of patients with ovarian cancer, focusing especially on physician-patient relationship and treatment.

Patients and methods

A questionnaire was developed based on the experiences of the national German survey 'Expression II', and was provided to patients with ovarian cancer either at initial diagnosis or with recurrent disease via Internet (online-version) or as print-out-version.

Results

From December 2009 to October 2012, a total of 1830 patients with ovarian cancer from eight European countries (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Romania, Spain) participated, 902 (49.3%) after initial diagnosis and 731 (39.9%) with recurrent ovarian cancer. The median age was 58 years (range 17-89). Nearly all patients (96.2%) had experienced upfront surgery followed by first-line chemotherapy (91.8%). The majority of patients were satisfied with the completeness and comprehensibility of the explanation about the diagnosis and treatment options. The three most important aspects, identified by patients to improve the treatment for ovarian cancer included: 'the therapy should not induce alopecia' (42%), 'there must be more done to counter fatigue' (34.5%) and 'the therapy should be more effective' (29.7%). Out of 659 (36%) patients, who were offered participation in a clinical trial, 476 (26%) were included.

Conclusion

This study underlines the high need of patients with ovarian cancer for all details concerning treatment options irrespective of their cultural background, the stage of disease and the patient's age. Increased information requirements regarding potential side effects and treatment alternatives were recorded. Besides the need for more effective therapy, alopecia and fatigue are the most important side effects of concern to patients.

Defining the information needs of lung cancer screening participants: a qualitative study

Introduction

Lung cancer screening (LCS) by low-dose CT has been shown to improve mortality, but individuals must consider the potential benefits and harms before making an informed decision about taking part. Shared decision-making is required for LCS in USA, though screening-eligible individuals' specific views of these harms, and their preferences for accessing this information, are not well described.

Methods

In this qualitative study, we aimed to explore knowledge and perceptions around lung cancer and LCS with a focus on harms. We carried out seven focus groups with screening-eligible individuals, which were divided into current versus former smokers and lower versus higher educational backgrounds; and 16 interviews with health professionals including general practitioners, respiratory physicians, lung cancer nurse specialists and public health consultants. Interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were coded inductively and analysed using the framework method.

Results

Fatalistic views about lung cancer as an incurable disease dominated, particularly among current smokers, and participants were often unaware of curative treatment options. Despite this, beliefs that screening is sensible and worthwhile were expressed. Generally participants felt they had the 'right' to an informed decision, though some cautioned against information overload. The potential harms of LCS were poorly understood, particularly overdiagnosis and radiation exposure, but participants were unlikely to be deterred by them. Strong concerns about false-negative results were expressed, while false-positive results and indeterminate nodules were also reported as concerning.

Conclusions

These findings demonstrate the need for LCS information materials to highlight information on the benefits of early detection and options for curative treatment, while accurately presenting the possible harms. Information needs are likely to vary between individuals and we recommend simple information materials to be made available to all individuals considering participating in LCS, with signposting to more detailed information for those who require it.

Applying behavioural science to increase uptake of the NHS Health Check: a randomised controlled trial of gain- and loss-framed messaging in the national patient information leaflet

BACKGROUND

The NHS Health Check (NHSHC) is a national programme for the prevention of non-communicable diseases. Patients aged 40-74 without an existing cardiovascular-related condition should be invited quinquennially. Uptake is lower than anticipated. We assessed the impact on uptake of two new behaviourally-enhanced leaflets (with the current national leaflet as a control), enclosed with the invitation letter: the first trial on the leaflet.

METHODS

A double-blind three-armed randomized controlled trial was conducted. The new leaflets were shorter (two pages, instead of four); one was loss-framed ('don't miss out') and the other was gain-framed ('make the most of life'). The participants were patients from 39 practices in Lewisham and 17 practices in NE Lincolnshire, who were allocated to interventions using a random-number generator and received one of the leaflets with their invitation letter from April-September 2018. The outcome measure was uptake of an NHSHC by November 2018. The trial was powered to detect a 2% effect.

RESULTS

Uptake was 17.6% in the control condition (n = 3677), 17.4% in the loss-framed condition (n = 3664), and 18.2% in the gain-framed condition (n = 3697). Leaflet type was not a significant predictor of NHSHC uptake in a logistic regression that controlled for demographic variables, with GP practice as a random effect. Statistically significant predictors of uptake included location (higher uptake in Lewisham), age (increased age was associated with increased attendance) and sex (higher uptake in females). The Bayes Factor comparing the null to a hypothesis of differences between conditions was 416, which is extreme evidence in favour of the null hypothesis.

CONCLUSION

There was no evidence for a meaningful effect of either a loss-framed or gain-framed behaviourally-informed leaflet type on uptake, which is surprising, given that behaviourally informed letters have improved uptake of NHSHCs. It is possible that people do not pay attention to leaflets that are enclosed with letters, or that the leaflet continues to support informed decision-making but this does not affect uptake.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03524131. Registered May 14, 2018. Retrospectively registered.

Patient perspectives on colorectal cancer screening and the role of general practice

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most frequent cause of cancer death in Australia. Early detection can reduce incidence and mortality. General practice-based initiatives have been proposed to improve CRC screening rates but to date have had modest impact. As there is limited research into the patient experience of CRC screening decision making, this study explored patient perspectives on CRC screening and the potential role for general practice.

Methods

Ten participants, aged between 50 and 74, from a general practice in South Australia were recruited by practice staff. Semi-structured interviews were conducted. Concurrent data collection and analysis were performed, guided by interpretative phenomenological analysis.

Results

Two key themes were evident: attitudes toward screening and potential roles for general practice. Participants structured the experience of screening in terms of being proactive, ambivalent or avoidant. Roles for general practice centred on tasks as educators, trusted advisors, monitors and screeners. Mixed views on whether general practice involvement was necessary prompted consideration of additional sources of health information and motivation around screening.

Conclusions

Exploration of the patient experience provides insight into how participants make sense of screening and perceived roles for general practice (or other agents) in screening. There is satisfaction with current Government-driven processes but perceived value in general practice playing a complementary part in increasing screening rates. A multifaceted strategy, accounting for attitudes, is required to improve screening and population health outcomes.

Matters of fact and politics: Generating expectations of cancer screening

Many countries, including Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States have established national screening programs in the effort to advance the early diagnosis of cancers. Australia has population screening programs for breast, bowel and cervical cancers, and this article focuses on breast and cervical cancer screening as the two longest running programs in Australia. While these screening programs are well-established and report relatively high participation rates, the effectiveness of population screening is a contested issue, subject to significant, ongoing debate about its purported benefits (Armstrong, 2019). In this article, we draw on ideas from sociology of science on the construction of scientific facts to analyse how evidentiary claims are presented in policy documents for Australia's breast and cervical cancer screening programs, and the implications for those who are the targets of screening. We explore how screening-related information assumes the status of scientific 'facts', and argue that presenting information as neutral and objective obscures the political choices involved in its generation. Importantly, some of the claims presented in the policy documents have a tendency to emphasise the benefits, and minimise the risks and harms of population-based screening. In doing so, we suggest that the current national policies may be contributing to sustaining expectations of screening that are higher than warranted. Higher expectations may bring with them unintended societal and economic costs to the public. We conclude by noting how deeply ingrained socio-cultural meanings of cancer shape public expectations of the protective value of screening, which allows current screening approaches to become further entrenched and resistant to challenge.

Do people with a different goal-orientation or specific focus make different decisions about colorectal cancer-screening participation?

Objective

Previous studies have shown that having promotion-oriented goals (e.g. wanting to become healthy) or prevention-oriented goals (e.g. wanting to avoid getting ill) can affect people’s health-related decisions and behaviour by emphasising aspects and information that seem relevant in light of what they want to achieve. However, this issue has not yet been researched regarding colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. With our study, we aimed to examine the relationship between people’s goal-orientation or focus on advantages or disadvantages and their CRC screening participation, as this could provide insights for supporting people in making this complex decision.

Methods

An online survey was carried out among a sample of first-time CRC screening invitees (1282 respondents, response rate 49%). We assessed people’s goal-orientation (i.e. promotion-orientation and prevention-orientation), focus on the advantages or disadvantages of CRC screening, screening participation and main considerations (e.g. cancer is a serious illness) concerning their screening decision.

Results

Generally, CRC screening participants scored higher on both promotion-orientation and prevention-orientation than non-participants. Both CRC screening participation and non-participation were not associated with a dominant goal-orientation. CRC screening participants did show a dominant focus on the advantages of CRC screening. Mediation analysis showed support for our premise that the relationship between people’s goal-orientation or focus on advantages or disadvantages and their screening participation could be (partially) mediated by people’s main considerations concerning CRC screening.

Conclusion

CRC screening participants and non-participants differed in their goal-orientation and focus on advantages or disadvantages. CRC screening participation appears to be associated with a focus on the advantages of CRC screening, which could impede the making of an informed decision. CRC screening non-participation appears not to be associated with any clear goal-orientation or focus, or we have not yet managed to capture this, which could be either beneficial or problematic for making an informed decision.

Why are the public so positive about colorectal cancer screening?

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is widely recommended. Earlier research showed that the general public are positive about CRC screening, as too the eligible CRC screening population. Among the eligible CRC screening population this positive perception has been shown to be associated with their perceptions of cancer, preventive health screening and their own health. It is unclear whether these concepts are also associated with the positive perception of the general public. Knowing this can provide insight into the context in which public perception concerning CRC screening is established. The aim of our study was to examine which main perceptions are associated with the public perception concerning CRC screening.

METHODS

An online survey was carried out in a Dutch population sample (adults 18+) among 1679 respondents (response rate was 56%). We assessed the public's perceptions concerning cancer, preventive health screening, own health, and the government, and examined their possible association with public opinion concerning CRC screening.

RESULTS

The public's positive attitude towards CRC screening is associated with the public's positive attitude towards preventive health screening in general, their perceived seriousness of cancer, their belief of health being important, and their trust in the government regarding national screening programmes.

CONCLUSION

Trust in the government and perceptions regarding the seriousness of cancer, preventive health screening and the importance of one's health seem to be important factors influencing how the public view CRC screening. The public are likely to process information about CRC screening in such a way that it confirms their existing beliefs of cancer being serious and preventive screening being positive. This makes it likely that they will notice information about the possible benefits of CRC screening more than information about its possible downsides, which would also contribute to the positive perception of CRC screening.

Individualized Colorectal Cancer Screening Discussions Between Older Adults and Their Primary Care Providers: A Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction. Discussions of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with older adults should be individualized to maximize appropriate screening. Our aim was to describe CRC screening discussions and explore their associations with patient characteristics and screening intentions. Methods. Cross-sectional survey of 422 primary care patients aged ≥70 years and eligible for CRC screening, including open-ended questions about CRC screening discussions. Primary outcomes were the frequency with which CRC screening discussions occurred, who had those discussions, and the domains that emerged from thematic analysis of participants' brief reports of their discussions. We also examined the associations between 1) patient characteristics and whether a screening discussion occurred and 2) the domains discussed and what screening decisions were made. Results. Of 422 participants, 209 reported having discussions and 201 responded to open-ended questions about CRC discussions. In a regression analysis, several factors were associated with increased odds of having a discussion: participants' preference to pursue screening (odds ratio [OR] 2.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3, 3.9), good health (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.7, 4.8), and receipt of the decision aid (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.4, 3.2). Our thematic analysis identified five domains related to discussion content and three related to discussion process. The CRC screening-related information domain was the most commonly discussed content domain, and the timing/frequency domain was associated with increased odds of intent to pursue screening. Decision-making role, the most commonly discussed process domain, was associated with increased odds of the intent to forgo CRC screening. Conclusions and Relevance. CRC screening discussions varied by type of participant and content. Future work is needed to determine if interventions focused on specific domains alters the appropriateness of participants' colorectal cancer screening intentions.

Development of an evidence-based brief 'talking' intervention for non-responders to bowel screening for use in primary care: stakeholder interviews

BACKGROUND

Bowel cancer is the third most common cause of cancer death worldwide. Bowel screening has been shown to reduce mortality and primary care interventions have been successful in increasing uptake of screening. Using evidence-based theory to inform the development of such interventions has been shown to increase their effectiveness. This study aimed to develop and refine a brief evidence-based intervention for eligible individuals whom have not responded to their last bowel screening invitation (non-responders), for opportunistic use by primary care providers during routine consultations.

METHODS

The development of a brief intervention involving a conversation between primary care providers and non-responders was informed by a multi-faceted model comprising: research team workshop and meetings to draw on expertise; evidence from the literature regarding barriers to bowel screening and effective strategies to promote informed participation; relevant psychological theory, and intervention development and behaviour change guidance. Qualitative telephone interviews with 1) bowel screening stakeholders and 2) patient non-responders explored views regarding the acceptability of the intervention to help refine its content and process.

RESULTS

The intervention provides a theory and evidence-based tool designed to be incorporated within current primary care practice. Bowel screening stakeholders were supportive of the intervention and recognised the importance of the role of primary care. Interviews highlighted the importance of brevity and simplicity to incorporate the intervention into routine clinical care. Non-responders similarly found the intervention acceptable, valuing a holistic approach to their care. Moreover, they expected their primary care provider to encourage participation.

CONCLUSIONS

A theory-based brief conversation for use in a primary care consultation was acceptable to bowel screening stakeholders and potential recipients, reflecting a health promoting primary care ethos. Findings indicate that it is appropriate to test the intervention in primary care in a feasibility study.

Public understanding of the purpose of cancer screening: A population-based survey

Objectives In examining informed choice in cancer screening, we investigated public awareness that some screening programmes aim to prevent cancer, while others seek to detect cancer at an early stage. Methods A population-based survey of adults aged 50-70 in England (n = 1433), including data on demographic characteristics and screening experience. Participants were asked to select the main purpose of cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening (both faecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy). Results Across all four screening programmes, most people thought the main aim was to catch cancer early (71-78%). Only 18 and 14% knew that cervical screening and flexible sigmoidoscopy, respectively, are primarily preventive. Knowledge of the preventive aspect of these two programmes was low across the board, with few demographic patterns. By contrast, 78 and 73% of the sample were aware that breast screening and the faecal occult blood test, respectively, predominantly aim to detect cancer early. For these programmes, accurate knowledge was socially graded, lower in ethnic minority groups, and positively associated with previous participation in the programmes. Conclusions Our findings suggest that although awareness of the purpose of early detection screening is high, awareness that screening can prevent cancer is low across all demographic groups. Understanding the purpose of screening is a key aspect of informed choice but despite current communication strategies highlighting these differences, people do not seem to have a nuanced understanding of these differing aims. Our findings may be indicative of a broader public scepticism about the preventability of cancer.

Attendance to cervical cancer screening among Roma and non-Roma women living in North-Western region of Romania

OBJECTIVES

Romania has Europe's highest incidence and mortality rates of cervical cancer. Participation in the national cervical cancer-screening programme is low, especially among minority Roma women.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study, using a structured questionnaire aiming to quantify reasons for screening attendance among women in North-Western region of Romania.

RESULTS

980 women were enrolled in this study. Data were analysed using logistic regression, estimating odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). This study revealed that Roma women (46%) attended screening less frequently that non-Roma women (63%),; however, ethnicity in itself was not associated with screening attendance. Instead we found that attendance to the cervical cancer screening programme was determined by having ever heard about a screening opportunity (OR 5.90, 95% CI 3.76-9.27) and having three or more sex partners (OR 5.99, 95% CI 1.71-21.04).

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that information about the screening programme's existence and its rationale does not reach the women targeted for screening sufficiently and argue that a process of user involvement aiming to build contact, interaction and cooperation between the programme and its potential participants is warranted.

Measuring Neurobehavioral Functioning in People With Traumatic Brain Injury: Rasch Analysis of Neurobehavioral Functioning Inventory

OBJECTIVE

To examine internal construct validity of the Neurobehavioral Functioning Inventory (NFI) by applying Rasch analysis.

SETTING

An outpatient rehabilitation program trial in New Zealand employing a goal-setting intervention in people with traumatic brain injury (TBI).

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred eight people (mean age = 46 years; 73% male) between 6 months and 5 years post-TBI.

DESIGN

Rasch analysis of the NFI (Partial Credit Model).

RESULTS

Three NFI subscales were not unidimensional and at least 4 items in each subscale had disordered response categories. Two items showed differential item functioning by age, 1 item by educational attainment, and 2 items were found to misfit the overall construct. These items were excluded from the total score calculation. The revised scale fit the Rasch model and supported the internal construct validity of the NFI.

CONCLUSIONS

Current scoring of the NFI subscales for people with TBI in New Zealand does not meet the requirements of the Rasch model. The revised version of NFI can improve the interpretation of scores but should be further tested with people with TBI in other settings.

The sociology of cancer: a decade of research

Biomedicine is often presented as the driving force behind improvements in cancer care, with genomics the latest innovation poised to change the meaning, diagnosis, treatment, prevention and lived experience of cancer. Reviewing sociological analyses of a diversity of patient and practitioner experiences and accounts of cancer during the last decade (2007-17), we explore the experiences of, approaches to and understandings of cancer in this period. We identify three key areas of focus: (i) cancer patient experiences and identities; (ii) cancer risk and responsibilities and (iii) bioclinical collectives. We explore these sociological studies of societal and biomedical developments and how sociologists have sought to influence developments in cancer identities, care and research. We end by suggesting that we extend our understanding of innovations in the fields of cancer research to take better account of these wider social and cultural innovations, together with patients, activists' and sociologists' contributions therein.

Cross-sectional analyses of participation in cancer screening and use of hormone replacement therapy and medications in meat eaters and vegetarians: the EPIC-Oxford study

OBJECTIVES

To examine differences in health-related behaviours such as screening or testing for cancer, use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and use of other medications in different diet groups.

DESIGN

We studied 31 260 participants across four diet groups (18 155 meat eaters, 5012 fish eaters, 7179 vegetarians, 914 vegans) in the UK EPIC-Oxford cohort. Information was collected in 5-year (around 2000-2003) or 10-year (around 2007) follow-up questionnaires regarding participation in breast screening, cervical screening, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, use of HRT and use of medications for the past 4 weeks. Using Poisson regression, we estimated the prevalence ratios (PR) for each behaviour across people of different diet groups, using meat eaters as the reference group.

RESULTS

Compared with meat eaters, vegetarian (PR: 0.94, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98) and vegan (PR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.95) women reported lower participation in breast screening, and vegetarian men were less likely to report PSA testing (PR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.96). No differences were observed among women for cervical screening. In women, all non-meat-eating groups reported lower use of HRT compared with meat eaters (P heterogeneity <0.0001). Lower reported use of any medication was observed for participants in all non-meat-eating groups with no (P<0.0001) or one (P=0.0002) self-reported illness. No heterogeneity was observed across the diet groups for the reported use of specific medication for high blood pressure, high blood cholesterol, asthma, diabetes and thyroid disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in self-reported breast screening, PSA testing, HRT use and overall medication use were observed across the diet groups. Whether such differences contribute to differential long-term disease risks requires further study.

Influencing Cancer Screening Participation Rates-Providing a Combined Cancer Screening Program (a 'One Stop' Shop) Could Be a Potential Answer

Introduction

Participation in established cancer screening programs remains variable. Therefore, a renewed focus on how to increase screening uptake, including addressing structural barriers such as time, travel, and cost is needed. One approach could be the provision of combined cancer screening, where multiple screening tests are provided at the same time and location (essentially a ‘One Stop’ screening shop). This cohort study explored both cancer screening behavior and the acceptability of a combined screening approach.

Methods

Participants of the North Western Adelaide Health Study (NWAHS), South Australia were invited to participate in a questionnaire about cancer screening behaviors and the acceptability of a proposed ‘One Stop’ cancer screening shop. Data were collected from 10th August 2015 to 18th January 2016, weighted for selection probability, age, and sex and analyzed using descriptive and multivariable logistic regression analysis.

Results

1,562 people, 52% female (mean age 54.1 years ± 15.2) participated. Reported screening participation was low, the highest being for Pap Smear (34.4%). Common reasons for screening participation were preventing sickness (56.1%, CI 53.2–59.0%), maintaining health (51%, CI 48–53.9%), and free program provision (30.9%, CI 28.2–33.6%). Females were less likely to state that screening is not beneficial [OR 0.37 (CI 0.21–0.66), p < 0.001] and to cite sickness prevention [OR 2.10 (CI 1.46–3.00), p < 0.001] and free program [OR 1.75 (CI 1.22–2.51), p < 0.003] as reasons for screening participation. Of those who did not participate, 34.6% (CI 30.3–39.1%) stated that there was nothing that discouraged them from participation, with 55- to 64-year olds [OR 0.24 (CI 0.07–0.74), p < 0.04] being less likely to cite this reason. 21% (CI 17.2–24.8%) thought they did not need screening, while a smaller proportion stated not having time (6.9%, CI 4.9–9.7%) and the costs associated with screening (5.2%, CI 3.5–7.7%). The majority of participants (85.3%, CI 81.9–88.2%) supported multiple screening being offered at the same time and location.

Conclusion

Identified screening behaviors in this study are similar to those reported in the literature. The high support for the concept of combined cancer screening demonstrates that this type of approach is acceptable to potential end users and warrants further investigation.

Is an opportunistic primary care-based intervention for non-responders to bowel screening feasible and acceptable? A mixed-methods feasibility study in Scotland

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to test whether a brief, opportunistic intervention in general practice was a feasible and acceptable way to engage with bowel screening non-responders.

DESIGN

This was a feasibility study testing an intervention which comprised a brief conversation during routine consultation, provision of a patient leaflet and instructions to request a replacement faecal occult blood test kit. A mixed-methods approach to evaluation was adopted. Data were collected from proformas completed after each intervention, from the Bowel Screening Centre database and from questionnaires. Semi-structured interviews were carried out. We used descriptive statistics, content and framework analysis to determine intervention feasibility and acceptability.

PARTICIPANTS

Bowel screening non-responders (as defined by the Scottish Bowel Screening Centre) and primary care professionals working in five general practices in Lothian, Scotland.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Several predefined feasibility parameters were assessed, including numbers of patients engaging in conversation, requesting a replacement kit and returning it, and willingness of primary care professionals to deliver the intervention.

RESULTS

The intervention was offered to 258 patients in five general practices: 220 (87.0%) engaged with the intervention, 60 (23.3%) requested a new kit, 22 (8.5%) kits were completed and returned. Interviews and questionnaires suggest that the intervention was feasible, acceptable and consistent with an existing health prevention agenda. Reported challenges referred to work-related pressures, time constraints and practice priorities.

CONCLUSIONS

This intervention was acceptable and resulted in a modest increase in non-responders participating in bowel screening, although outlined challenges may affect sustained implementation. The strategy is also aligned with the increasing role of primary care in promoting bowel screening.

Ethical issues with colorectal cancer screening-a systematic review

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is widely recommended and implemented. However, sometimes CRC screening is not implemented despite good evidence, and some types of CRC screening are implemented despite lack of evidence. The objective of this article is to expose and elucidate relevant ethical issues in the literature on CRC screening that are important for open and transparent deliberation on CRC screening.

METHODS

An axiological question-based method is used for exposing and elucidating ethical issues relevant in HTA. A literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed Bioethics subset, ISI Web of Knowledge, Bioethics Literature Database (BELIT), Ethics in Medicine (ETHMED), SIBIL Base dati di bioetica, LEWI Bibliographic Database on Ethics in the Sciences and Humanities, and EUROETHICS identified 870 references of which 114 were found relevant according to title and abstract. The content of the included papers were subject to ethical analysis to highlight the ethical issues, concerns, and arguments.

RESULTS

A wide range of important ethical issues were identified. The main benefits are reduced relative CRC mortality rate, and potentially incidence rate, but there is no evidence of reduced absolute mortality rate. Potential harms are bleeding, perforation, false test results, overdetection, overdiagnosis, overtreatment (including unnecessary removal of polyps), and (rarely) death. Other important issues are related to autonomy and informed choice equity, justice, medicalization, and expanding disease.

CONCLUSION

A series of important ethical issues have been identified and need to be addressed in open and transparent deliberation on CRC screening.

Client and practitioner perspectives on the screening mammography experience

Mammography can be painful and unpleasant, but effective interventions to improve the experience remain scarce. As a first step towards more effective interventions, we aimed to achieve a thorough, contemporary understanding of thoughts, feelings and behaviours which affect and arise from mammography experiences. Research and professional experience suggest that the interaction between client and practitioner may be paramount in determining the quality of a client's experience. Therefore, this study aimed to capture the perspectives of clients and mammography staff from UK breast screening programmes. Thematic analysis of semi-structured qualitative in-depth interviews with 22 clients and 18 staff revealed that clients had positive attitudes to breast screening and mostly low knowledge about potential harms. Staff data indicated that some women attend for breast screening under pressure from others. Pain and coping with it were prominent themes, with wide variations in pain experiences. Clients recognised differences in mammographers' abilities to put them at ease. Staff difficulties included empowering clients within the confines of a taxing technique, and maintaining compassionate care when under strain. Future intervention development should focus on the information and support needs of women prior to the appointment and on effectively training and supporting mammographers to deal with challenging encounters.

Accessibility of standardized information of a national colorectal cancer screening program for low health literate screening invitees: A mixed method study

OBJECTIVE

To explore the accessibility of standardized printed information materials of the national Dutch colorectal cancer screening program among low health literate screening invitees and to assess the effect of the information on their knowledge about colorectal cancer and the screening program.

METHODS

Linguistic tools were used to analyze the text and design characteristics. The accessibility, comprehensibility and relevance of the information materials were explored in interviews and in observations (n=25). The effect of the information on knowledge was assessed in an online survey (n=127).

RESULTS

The materials employed a simple text and design. However, respondents expressed problems with the amount of information, and the difference between screening and diagnostic follow-up. Knowledge significantly increased in 10 out of 16 items after reading the information but remained low for colorectal cancer risk, sensitivity of testing, and the voluntariness of colorectal cancer screening.

CONCLUSION

Despite intelligible linguistic and design characteristics, screening invitees with low health literacy had problems in accessing, comprehending and applying standard information materials on colorectal cancer screening, and lacked essential knowledge for informed decision-making about participation.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

To enable equal access to informed decision-making, information strategies need to be adjusted to the skills of low health literate screening invitees.

The Dutch public are positive about the colorectal cancer-screening programme, but is this a well-informed opinion?

BACKGROUND

Population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is widely recommended, and members of the eligible screening population seem to be positive about it. However, it is not well known how people outside the eligible screening population view CRC screening, and whether they are supportive of the government providing this. Public opinion may affect people's personal views and their screening decision. The aim of our study was to examine the opinion of the Dutch general public regarding the national CRC screening programme.

METHOD

An online survey was carried out in a Dutch population sample of adults aged 18 and older, assessing level of support, personal attitude, collective attitude, perceived social norm, awareness, and knowledge regarding the CRC screening programme.

RESULTS

The response rate was 56% (n = 1679/3000). Generally, the Dutch public are positive about and supportive of the CRC screening programme. We found the biggest proportion of support (86%) when people were asked directly. A smaller proportion (48%) was supportive when people had to choose between other options concerning how the government could possibly deal with CRC. People report knowing more about the benefits of CRC screening than about its possible harms and risks. Many people found it difficult to answer the knowledge questions that asked about numerical information concerning CRC screening correctly.

CONCLUSION

People were less supportive of the CRC screening programme when having to choose between other options concerning dealing with CRC, and their support may not be based on a full comprehension of what CRC screening entails. Further research is needed to establish what knowledge people need in order to form a well-founded opinion.

Concerns, perceived need and competing priorities: a qualitative exploration of decision-making and non-participation in a population-based flexible sigmoidoscopy screening programme to prevent colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Optimising uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is important to achieve projected health outcomes. Population-based screening by flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) was introduced in England in 2013 (NHS Bowel scope screening). Little is known about reactions to the invitation to participate in FS screening, as offered within the context of the Bowel scope programme. We aimed to investigate responses to the screening invitation to inform understanding of decision-making, particularly in relation to non-participation in screening.

DESIGN

Qualitative analysis of semistructured in-depth interviews and written accounts.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

People from 31 general practices in the North East and East of England invited to attend FS screening as part of NHS Bowel scope screening programme were sent invitations to take part in the study. We purposively sampled interviewees to ensure a range of accounts in terms of beliefs, screening attendance, sex and geographical location.

RESULTS

20 screeners and 25 non-screeners were interviewed. Written responses describing reasons for, and circumstances surrounding, non-participation from a further 28 non-screeners were included in the analysis. Thematic analysis identified a range of reactions to the screening invitation, decision-making processes and barriers to participation. These include a perceived or actual lack of need; inability to attend; anxiety and fear about bowel preparation, procedures or hospital; inability or reluctance to self-administer an enema; beliefs about low susceptibility to bowel cancer or treatment and understanding of harm and benefits. The strength, rather than presence, of concerns about the test and perceived need for reassurance were important in the decision to participate for screeners and non-screeners. Decision-making occurs within the context of previous experiences and day-to-day life.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the reasons for non-participation in FS screening can help inform strategies to improve uptake and may be transferable to other screening programmes.

The prevalence of medical reasons for non-participation in the Scottish breast and bowel cancer screening programmes

Objective

Increasing uptake of cancer screening is a priority for health systems internationally, however, some patients may not attend because they are undergoing active treatment for the cancer of interest or have other medical reasons that mean participation would be inappropriate. This study aims to quantify the proportion of non-participants who have a medical reason for not attending cancer screening.

Methods

Medical reasons for not participating in breast and bowel screening were defined a priori on the basis of a literature review and expert opinion. The notes of 700 patients at two GP practices in Scotland were reviewed, to ascertain the prevalence of medical reasons amongst non-participants. Simple proportions and confidence intervals were calculated.

Results

17.4% of breast and 2.3% of bowel screening non-participants had a medical reason to not participate. The two most common reasons were previous breast cancer follow up (8.86%) and recent mammogram (6.57%).

Conclusion

These patients may not benefit from screening while also being distressed by receiving an invitation. This issue also makes accurate monitoring and target-setting for improving uptake difficult. Further work is needed to estimate robustly the extent to which medical reasons account for screening non-participation in a larger population.

When health means suffering: mammograms, pain and compassionate care

The X-ray mammogram remains the cornerstone of most public health programmes aimed at the early diagnosis of breast cancer. Its virtues of safety, reliability and cheapness maintain its established position, and Western social and cultural traditions of ambivalence to pain push any questions concerning the painfulness of the procedure into the background. As part of a larger UK/USA-based empirical study, we undertook a qualitative analysis of women's accounts of pain experienced in mammograms and their reaction to it, comparing their accounts with professional views and advice to patients as reflected in interviews, patient leaflets and practice guidelines. We found considerable variability of experience and reaction to pain among patients, and indications of similar variability in professionals' views and practice, contrasting with a uniformly reassuring message in formal institutional advice. We suggest that in practice professional work-arounds and patients' felt obligation to tolerate pain bridge this gap, but that action to tackle the problems of dropout and the emotional and operational costs of the current system is nonetheless needed. The need is for concerned groups to combine to establish a serious and sustained programme of amelioration and innovative technological development to assure more compassionate patient care and operational efficiency.

Women's participation in breast cancer screening in France--an ethical approach

Background

Breast cancer is a major public health challenge. Organized mammography screening (OS) is considered one way to reduce breast cancer mortality. EU recommendations prone mass deployment of OS, and back in 2004, France introduced a national OS programme for women aged 50–74 years. However, in 2012, participation rate was still just 52.7%, well short of the targeted 70% objective. In an effort to re-address the (in) efficiency of the programme, the French National Cancer Institute has drafted an expert-group review of the ethical issues surrounding breast cancer mammography screening.

Discussion

Prompted by emerging debate over the efficiency of the screening scheme and its allied public information provision, we keynote the experts’ report based on analysis of epidemiological data and participation rate from the public health authorities. The low coverage of the OS scheme may be partly explained by the fact that a significant number of women undergo mammography outside OS and thus outside OS criteria. These findings call for further thinking on (i) the ethical principles of beneficence and non-malfeasance underpinning this public health initiative, (ii) the reasons behind women’s and professionals’ behavior, and (iii) the need to analyze how information provision to women and the doctor-patient relationship need to evolve in response to scientific controversy over the risks and benefits of conducting mammographic screening.

Summary

This work calls for a reappraisal of the provision of screening programme information. We advocate a move to integrate the points sparking debate over the efficiency of the screening scheme to guarantee full transparency. The perspective is to strengthen the respect for autonomy allowing women to make an informed choice in their decision on whether or not to participate.

Informed choice in bowel cancer screening: a qualitative study to explore how adults with lower education use decision aids

BACKGROUND

Offering informed choice in screening is increasingly advocated, but little is known about how evidence-based information about the benefits and harms of screening influences understanding and participation in screening.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to explore how a bowel cancer screening decision aid influenced decision making and screening behaviour among adults with lower education and literacy.

METHODS

Twenty-one men and women aged 55-64 years with lower education levels were interviewed about using a decision aid to make their screening decision. Participants were purposively selected to include those who had and had not made an informed choice.

RESULTS

Understanding the purpose of the decision aid was an important factor in whether participants made an informed choice about screening. Participants varied in how they understood and integrated quantitative risk information about the benefits and harms of screening into their decision making; some read it carefully and used it to justify their screening decision, whereas others dismissed it because they were sceptical of it or lacked confidence in their own numeracy ability. Participants' prior knowledge and beliefs about screening influenced how they made sense of the information.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Participants valued information that offered them a choice in a non-directive way, but were concerned that it would deter people from screening. Healthcare providers need to be aware that people respond to screening information in diverse ways involving a range of literacy skills and cognitive processes.

Using Adult Children to Enhance Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening

We pre-tested if a new communication strategy addressed to adult children could be effective in helping to improve colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) participation rates. In a first study we used a sample of undergraduate students who participated in an experiment with six different conditions to analyze their risk perceptions regarding CRCS and their family role. A second study with a portion of that sample was also achieved to give robustness to the findings. In addition, we achieved a third study using the first sample to replicate previous findings. In a fourth study we used a sample of participants above 50 years old in order to test if the responses regarding how adult children advise their parents and their perceived influence regarding adopting healthy behaviour were similar to parents’ responses to the same questions. A final fifth study was achieved to inquire about the reasons why adult children would decide to advise their parents if a hypothetical marketing campaign was targeted at them. The results showed that designing a communication campaign addressed to adult children could help to increase rates. This result is mainly derived from the role adult children play in a parent’s decision about health behaviour, and the willingness to influence parents to participate in the screening. Adult children could also prescribe CRCS to their parents, as health services or celebrities do. Therefore, they might help to convince the at-risk population to comply with the screening, and consequently, to enhance participation rates.

Interventions to enhance informed choices among invitees of screening programmes-a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Informed decision making about participation has become an explicit purpose in invitations for screening programmes in western countries. An informed choice is commonly defined as based on: (i) adequate levels of knowledge of the screening and (ii) agreement between the invitee's values towards own screening participation and actual (intention to) participation.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed published studies that empirically evaluated the effects of interventions aiming at enhancing informed decision making in screening programmes targeted at the general population. We focused on prenatal screening and neonatal screening for diseases of the foetus/new-born and screening for breast cancer, cervical cancer and colorectal cancer. The Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for studies published till April 2012, using the terms 'informed choice', 'decision making' and 'mass screening' separately and in combination and terms referring to the specific screening programmes.

RESULTS

Of the 2238 titles identified, 15 studies were included, which evaluated decision aids (DAs), information leaflets, film, video, counselling and a specific screening visit for informed decision making in prenatal screening, breast and colorectal cancer screening. Most of the included studies evaluated DAs and showed improved knowledge and informed decision making. Due to the limited number of studies the results could not be synthesized.

CONCLUSION

The empirical evidence regarding interventions to improve informed decision making in screening is limited. It is unknown which strategies to enhance informed decision making are most effective, although DAs are promising. Systematic development of interventions to enhance informed choices in screening deserves priority, especially in disadvantaged groups.

Attitudes and beliefs of non-participants in a population-based screening programme for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Uptake of colorectal cancer screening programmes needs to be improved or at least maintained in order to achieve projected reductions in mortality and morbidity. Understanding the origins of non-participation in screening is therefore important.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the beliefs and experiences of individuals who had not responded either to their screening invitation or reminder.

DESIGN

A qualitative study using in-depth interviews with non-participants from England's population-based colorectal cancer screening programme. Data collection and analysis were carried out using a grounded theory approach, with an emphasis on the constant comparison method, and continued until saturation (27 interviews).

FINDINGS

The interviews provided an in-depth understanding of a range of reasons and circumstances surrounding non-participation in screening, including contextual and environmental influences as well as factors specific to the screening test. Non-participation in screening was not necessarily associated with negative attitudes towards screening or a decision to not return a kit. Reasons for non-participation in screening included not feeling that participation is personally necessary, avoiding or delaying decision making, and having some degree of intention to take part but failing to do so because of practicalities, conflicting priorities or external circumstances. Beliefs, awareness and intention change over time.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

A range of approaches may be required to improve screening uptake. Some non-participants may already have a degree of intention to take part in screening in the future, and this group may be more responsive to interventions based on professional endorsement, repeat invitations, reminders and aids to making the test more practical.

The effect of information about false negative and false positive rates on people's attitudes towards colorectal cancer screening using faecal occult blood testing (FOBt)

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact of numeric risk information about false negative (FN) and false positive (FP) rates in faecal occult blood testing (FOBt) on attitudes towards screening.

METHODS

95 people aged 45-59, living in England, read 6 hypothetical vignettes presented online about the use of FOB testing to detect bowel cancer, in which information about FN and FP rates was systematically varied.

RESULTS

Both verbal and numeric FN risk information reduced people's interest in screening compared with no FN information. Numeric FN risk information reduced people's perceptions of screening effectiveness and lowered perceived trust in the results of screening compared with both verbal FN information and no FN information. FP information did not affect attitudes towards FOB testing. There was limited evidence that FN information reduced interest and perceptions of screening effectiveness more in educated groups.

CONCLUSION

Numeric FN risk information decreased people's perceptions of screening effectiveness and trust in the results of screening but did not affect people's interest in screening anymore than verbal FN risk information.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Numeric FN information could be added to patient information without affecting interest in screening, although this needs to be replicated in a larger, more representative sample.

Informed decision-making in colorectal cancer screening using colonoscopy or CT-colonography

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the level of informed decision making in a randomized controlled trial comparing colonoscopy and CT-colonography for colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS

8844 citizens aged 50-75 were randomly invited to colonoscopy (n=5924) or CT-colonography (n=2920) screening. All invitees received an information leaflet. Screenees received a questionnaire within 4 weeks before the planned examination, non-screenees 4 weeks after the invitation. A decision was categorized as informed when characterized by sufficient decision-relevant knowledge and consistent with personal attitudes toward participation in screening.

RESULTS

Knowledge and attitude items were completed by 1032/1276 colonoscopy screenees (81%), by 698/4648 colonoscopy non-screenees (15%), by 824/982 CT-colonography screenees (84%) and by 192/1938 CT-colonography non-screenees (10%). 1027 colonoscopy screenees (>99%) and 815 CT-colonography screenees (99%) had adequate knowledge; 915 (89%) and 742 (90%) had a positive attitude. 675 non-screenees invited to colonoscopy (97%) and 182 invited to CT-colonography (95%) had adequate knowledge; 344 (49%) and 94 (49%) expressed a negative attitude.

CONCLUSION

A large majority of screenees made an informed decision on participation. Almost half of responding non-screenees, made an uninformed decision, suggesting additional barriers to participation.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Efforts to understand the additional barriers will create opportunities to facilitate informed participation to colorectal cancer screening.

Communication about colorectal cancer screening in Britain: public preferences for an expert recommendation

BACKGROUND

Informed decision-making approaches to cancer screening emphasise the importance of decisions being determined by individuals' own values and preferences. However, advice from a trusted source may also contribute to autonomous decision-making. This study examined preferences regarding a recommendation from the NHS and information provision in the context of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.

METHODS

In face-to-face interviews, a population-based sample of adults across Britain (n=1964; age 50-80 years) indicated their preference between: (1) a strong recommendation to participate in CRC screening, (2) a recommendation alongside advice to make an individual decision, and (3) no recommendation but advice to make an individual decision. Other measures included trust in the NHS and preferences for information on benefits and risks.

RESULTS

Most respondents (84%) preferred a recommendation (47% strong recommendation, 37% recommendation plus individual decision-making advice), but the majority also wanted full information on risks (77%) and benefits (78%). Men were more in favour of a recommendation than women (86% vs 81%). Trust in the NHS was high overall, but the minority who expressed low trust were less likely to want a recommendation.

CONCLUSION

Most British adults want full information on risks and benefits of screening but they also want a recommendation from an authoritative source. An 'expert' view may be an important part of autonomous health decision-making.

The sociology of medical screening: past, present and future

Medical screening raises fundamental issues for sociological inquiry, but at present a well-developed sociology of medical screening is lacking. This special issue on the sociology of screening brings together an exciting collection of new work that tackles medical screening from a variety of theoretical and methodological approaches. In this opening paper, we begin by explaining what we mean by screening, and why we believe screening merits sociological attention. Secondly, we reflect on the sociology of screening to date and provide an introduction for those new to this area. We then provide an overview of the papers in this collection, highlighting links and contrasts between papers. We conclude by reflecting on sociology's potential contribution to wider debates about screening, and propose future research directions.

Obstacles to colorectal screening in general practice: a qualitative study of GPs and patients

BACKGROUND

The faecal occult blood test (FOBT) has proven efficiency at screening populations for an average risk of colorectal cancer. Mortality related to this cancer decreases by 15-18% among adults, 50-74 years old, tested every 2 years. A participation rate of at least 50% is desirable. This rate has not yet been reached in most French regions.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the obstacles to mass colorectal screening in France.

METHOD

In 2009, five focus groups were conducted in different areas to explore physicians' obstacles to FOBT screening. The patients' obstacles were assessed in semi-structured interviews. A purposive sampling had been carried out for both GPs and patients. The focus groups were coded using Nvivo 8(®) software by three researchers; the interviews manually coded by two researchers.

RESULTS

GPs reported insufficient training and some doubted the relevance of screening. They expressed concern of having insufficient time for the test during a consultation, as well as practical and administrative obstacles. Some GPs experienced difficulty persuading patients who had no signs of colorectal disease. Obstacles for patients were mainly difficulties in doing screening themselves and a perception of health care that didn't match with screening. Information and organization were also important points to improve. The screening process was considered complex both by GPs and by patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Numerous obstacles to colorectal screening, from both the physicians' and the patients' perspectives, were found. The major goal to improve mass screening may be to increase awareness and understanding of both physicians and patients regarding this process.

Informed choice on Pap smear still limited by lack of knowledge on the meaning of false-positive or false-negative test results

OBJECTIVE

Screening for cervical cancer may have favourable or unfavourable effects at the individual level. This study assesses whether invitees in The Netherlands made an informed choice about screen uptake.

METHODS

Attached to the invitation letter and the information leaflet, screen invitees were sent a questionnaire. An informed decision was defined as based on decision-relevant knowledge, while the woman's attitude was consistent with her actual screening behaviour.

RESULTS

Of all cervical screen participants, 60% (924/1551) responded to the questionnaire. Decision-relevant knowledge was sufficient in 595 women. Especially knowledge about false-positive and false-negative test results was limited. The attitude towards cervical screening was mainly positive (99%). Requirements for informed decision making were met in 571 (68%) women and in 91% when an alternative cut-off point of sufficient decision-relevant knowledge was applied. Most frequently reported main reasons to attend were early detection of abnormalities (67%) and reassurance in case of a normal smear (22%).

CONCLUSION

Insufficient decision-relevant knowledge was the main cause of uninformed attendance.

PRACTICE IMPLICATION

Adequate strategies to provide invitees with sufficient decision-relevant information are still needed, especially regarding false-positive and false-negative test results.