The importance of people's values and preferences for colorectal cancer screening participation
The importance of people's values and preferences for colorectal cancer screening participation
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/eurpub/ckw266
复制
发表时间：
2017-12-01
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Wengstrom, Yvonne
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fritzell, Kaisa;Nilsson, Kerstin Stake;Wengstrom, Yvonne
为了探讨个体在决定是否参加结直肠癌（CRC）筛查时的原因，随机分配到瑞典结肠筛查（SCREESTING）计划中的FIT或结肠镜检查的个体被邀请进行焦点小组讨论和个人电话访谈。共同决策的概念（SDM：信息;价值观/偏好;参与）被用作分析的矩阵。为了验证研究结果，额外的焦点小组讨论使用名义组technique performed.Lack of knowledge of CRC and CRC screening是突出的参与者和非参与者，而结果不同的群体之间的关系，他们的价值观和偏好。重要他人的影响力促进了参与，同时也阻碍了非参与者的参与。参与者和未参与者明确表示，在做出决定时没有必要让医疗保健专业人员参与。根据结果，可以应用不同的方式来传播CRC和CRC筛查的知识和沟通，例如，以社区为基础的信息宣传活动，决策辅助工具，交互式问卷，聊天功能和电话支持。参与者和非参与者之间的价值观和偏好差异可能是理解非参与者为什么决定不参与的关键，并值得进一步探讨。
To explore how individuals reason when they make decisions about participating in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening.Individuals randomized to FIT or colonoscopy included in the Screening of Swedish Colons (SCREESCO) program was invited to focus group discussions and individual telephone interviews. The concept of shared decision-making (SDM: information; values/preferences; involvement) was used as a matrix for the analyses. To validate findings, additional focus group discussions using the nominal group technique were performed.Lack of knowledge of CRC and CRC screening was prominent for participants and non-participants, while the results differed between the groups in relation to their values and preferences. The influence of significant others promoted participation while it prevented it among non-participants. Those who participated and those who did not made it clear that there was no need to involve health care professionals when making the decision.Based on the results, a display of different ways to spread knowledge and communicate about CRC and CRC-screening could be applied such as, community-based information campaigns, decisions aids, interactive questionnaires, chat-functions and telephone support. The disparity in values and preferences between participants and non-participants may be the key to understand why non-participants make their decisions not to participate and warrant further exploration.