Cargando…

Incorporating cancer risk information into general practice: a qualitative study using focus groups with health professionals

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that approximately 40% of all cases of cancer are attributable to lifestyle factors. Providing people with personalised information about their future risk of cancer may help promote behaviour change. AIM: To explore the views of health professionals on incorporating pers...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Usher-Smith, Juliet A, Silarova, Barbora, Ward, Alison, Youell, Jane, Muir, Kenneth R, Campbell, Jackie, Warcaba, Joanne
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Royal College of General Practitioners 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5325664/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28193618
http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgp17X689401
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: It is estimated that approximately 40% of all cases of cancer are attributable to lifestyle factors. Providing people with personalised information about their future risk of cancer may help promote behaviour change. AIM: To explore the views of health professionals on incorporating personalised cancer risk information, based on lifestyle factors, into general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study using data from six focus groups with a total of 24 general practice health professionals from the NHS Nene Clinical Commissioning Group in England. METHOD: The focus groups were guided by a schedule covering current provision of lifestyle advice relating to cancer and views on incorporating personalised cancer risk information. Data were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, and then analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Providing lifestyle advice was viewed as a core activity within general practice but the influence of lifestyle on cancer risk was rarely discussed. The word ‘cancer’ was seen as a potentially powerful motivator for lifestyle change but the fact that it could generate health anxiety was also recognised. Most focus group participants felt that a numerical risk estimate was more likely to influence behaviour than generic advice. All felt that general practice should provide this information, but there was a clear need for additional resources for it to be offered widely. CONCLUSION: Study participants were in support of providing personalised cancer risk information in general practice. The findings highlight a number of potential benefits and challenges that will inform the future development of interventions in general practice to promote behaviour change for cancer prevention.