Dutch individuals’ views of screening for oesophageal cancer: a focus group study

Objective Screening for early oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC), including its precursor Barrett’s oesophagus (BO), can potentially reduce OAC-related morbidity and mortality. This study explores Dutch at-risk individuals’ views of screening an at-risk population for BO/OAC.Design We invited 372 individuals with risk factors for OAC from primary care practices, 73 individuals with surveillance experience, and 221 participants of previous studies (BO/OAC screening trial or survey) to participate in focus groups. Transcripts were inductively and thematically analysed by two independent researcher... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Yonne Peters
Jasmijn Sijben
Sharell Bas
Peter Siersema
Linda Rainey
Mireille Broeders
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2023
Reihe/Periodikum: BMJ Open Gastroenterology, Vol 10, Iss 1 (2023)
Verlag/Hrsg.: BMJ Publishing Group
Schlagwörter: Diseases of the digestive system. Gastroenterology / RC799-869
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-28989081
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2023-001136

Objective Screening for early oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC), including its precursor Barrett’s oesophagus (BO), can potentially reduce OAC-related morbidity and mortality. This study explores Dutch at-risk individuals’ views of screening an at-risk population for BO/OAC.Design We invited 372 individuals with risk factors for OAC from primary care practices, 73 individuals with surveillance experience, and 221 participants of previous studies (BO/OAC screening trial or survey) to participate in focus groups. Transcripts were inductively and thematically analysed by two independent researchers.Results A total of 50 individuals (42% with gastro-oesophageal reflux symptoms) of 50–75 years participated. Themes that were raised included: theme 1 ‘screening intentions’ describing participants’ motivation to be screened (eg, early diagnosis, potential reassurance, physician recommendation, and knowing someone with cancer) or decline screening (eg, anticipated discomfort or suboptimal accuracy of the test); theme 2 ‘risk-based eligibility’ describing the tension between effectiveness (eg, targeting high-risk individuals) and inclusivity (eg, making screening available for everyone); theme 3 ‘distributive justice’, in which the pressure of a potential new screening programme on healthcare resources was discussed; and theme 4 ‘information needs’ describing the perceived lack of information access and individuals’ preference to discuss screening with their general practitioner.Conclusion Individuals not only expressed high willingness to be screened but also voiced the concern that a new screening programme may pressure limited healthcare resources. If implemented, it is crucial to develop educational materials that meet the public’s information needs and explain the test procedures and eligibility criteria while avoiding stigmatising language.