Patient education and counseling · 2019
A stitch in time saves nine: Perceptions about colorectal cancer screening after a non-cancer colonoscopy result. Qualitative study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kirkegaard Pia, Edwards Adrian, Andersen Berit
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To explore perceptions of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among participants who have experienced a 'false alarm' for CRC, and to explore perceptions about the relevance of screening for themselves or others.
METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with screening participants who had participated in the Danish CRC screening program and experienced a 'false alarm' for colorectal cancer. A thematic analysis was performed, based on an interpretive tradition of ethnography.
RESULTS: Perceptions about CRC screening after a non-cancer colonoscopy result were characterized by trust in the colonoscopy result showing no CRC, and satisfaction with the screening offer despite the risk for 'false alarm'. The patient-involving behavior of the healthcare professionals during the examination was for most participants a cornerstone for trusting the validity of the colonoscopy result showing no CRC. Strong notions about perceived obligation to participate in screening were common.
CONCLUSIONS: Prominent themes were trust in the result, satisfaction with the procedure, and moral obligations to participate both for themselves and for others.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Information to future invitees after a 'false alarm' experience could build on peoples' trust in the validity of a previous non-cancer result and should underscore the importance of subsequent screening even after a 'false alarm' for cancer.
METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with screening participants who had participated in the Danish CRC screening program and experienced a 'false alarm' for colorectal cancer. A thematic analysis was performed, based on an interpretive tradition of ethnography.
RESULTS: Perceptions about CRC screening after a non-cancer colonoscopy result were characterized by trust in the colonoscopy result showing no CRC, and satisfaction with the screening offer despite the risk for 'false alarm'. The patient-involving behavior of the healthcare professionals during the examination was for most participants a cornerstone for trusting the validity of the colonoscopy result showing no CRC. Strong notions about perceived obligation to participate in screening were common.
CONCLUSIONS: Prominent themes were trust in the result, satisfaction with the procedure, and moral obligations to participate both for themselves and for others.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Information to future invitees after a 'false alarm' experience could build on peoples' trust in the validity of a previous non-cancer result and should underscore the importance of subsequent screening even after a 'false alarm' for cancer.