Advice after urgent suspected cancer referral when cancer is not found in England: Survey of patients' preferences and perceived acceptability.

Cancer Cancer Screening Early Detection Early Diagnosis Health promotion Neoplasm Opportunistic intervention Patient Survey Public Health

Journal

Preventive medicine reports
ISSN: 2211-3355
Titre abrégé: Prev Med Rep
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101643766

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jul 2024
Historique:
received: 04 01 2024
revised: 30 05 2024
accepted: 01 06 2024
medline: 8 7 2024
pubmed: 8 7 2024
entrez: 8 7 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

No standardised approach exists to provide advice after urgent suspected cancer (USC) referral when cancer is not found. This study aimed to assess preferences and acceptability of receiving advice after USC referral related to: 1) managing ongoing symptoms, 2) responding to early symptoms of other cancers, 3) cancer screening, 4) reducing risks of future cancer. 2,541 patients from two English NHS Trusts were mailed a survey 1-3 months after having no cancer found following urgent suspected gastrointestinal or head and neck cancer referral. Participants were asked about: willingness to receive advice; prospective acceptability; preferences related to mode, timing and who should provide advice; and previous advice receipt. 406 patients responded (16.0%) with 397 in the final analyses. Few participants had previously received advice, yet most were willing to. Willingness varied by type of advice: fewer were willing to receive advice about early symptoms of other cancers (88.9%) than advice related to ongoing symptoms (94.3%). Acceptability was relatively high for all advice types. Reducing the risk of future cancer advice was more acceptable. Acceptability was lower in those from ethnic minority groups, and with lower levels of education. Most participants preferred to receive advice from a doctor; with results or soon after; either face to face or via the telephone. There is a potential unmet need for advice after USC referral when no cancer is found. Equitable intervention design should focus on increasing acceptability for people from ethnic minority groups and those with lower levels of education.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38975283
doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2024.102781
pii: S2211-3355(24)00196-7
pmc: PMC11225704
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

102781

Informations de copyright

© 2024 The Author(s).

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Auteurs

Ruth E C Evans (R)

Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, UK.
King's College London, UK.

Harriet Watson (H)

Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, UK.

Jo Waller (J)

Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, UK.
King's College London, UK.

Brian D Nicholson (BD)

Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, UK.

Thomas Round (T)

King's College London, UK.
National Disease Registration Service, NHS England, UK.

Carolynn Gildea (C)

National Disease Registration Service, NHS England, UK.

Debs Smith (D)

Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, UK.

Suzanne E Scott (SE)

Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, UK.
King's College London, UK.

Classifications MeSH