PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands, population-based cancer screening programmes (CSPs) are organized aiming at cervical, breast and colorectal cancer. For a CSP to be effective, high participation rates are essential; however, there is an alarming downward trend, including wide regional variation in screening uptake. General practitioner (GP) involvement can have a stimulating effect on screening participation. Current GP involvement is however, limited, varies between the programmes and has changed over time. Unexplored is what GPs think of their role(s) in the CSPs. The aim of this study was therefore to map the perceptions and beliefs of GPs regarding their current and future role in the Dutch CSPs.
METHODS: A mixed-methods sequential explanatory study was conducted in the Leiden/The Hague area of the Netherlands, between the end of 2021 and 2022. A questionnaire was developed and distributed among 110 GPs. The aggregated results obtained from the questionnaires served as starting points for conducting semi-structured interviews, with purposefully selected GPs. With this sequential approach we aimed to further enhance the understanding of the questionnaire data, and delved into the topics that emerged from the questionnaire responses.
RESULTS: In total, 46 GPs completed the online questionnaire (response rate 42%). Subsequent five semi-structured comprehensive interviews were conducted. GPs indicated that they frequently encounter the CSP in their daily practice and consider it important. They also emphasised it is important that GPs remain closely involved with the CSPs in the future. Nevertheless, GPs also repeatedly mentioned that they are not eager to take on more logistical/organizational tasks. They are however willing to empower CSPs in a positive manner.
CONCLUSIONS: GPs were generally positive about the CSPs and their current role within these programmes. Nevertheless, several options have been proposed to improve the CSPs, especially to increase screening uptake for populations in a socioeconomically disadvantaged position. Since it is of utmost importance to screen those who are most at risk of developing the screening-specific tumours, efforts should be made to achieve this goal.
METHODS: A mixed-methods sequential explanatory study was conducted in the Leiden/The Hague area of the Netherlands, between the end of 2021 and 2022. A questionnaire was developed and distributed among 110 GPs. The aggregated results obtained from the questionnaires served as starting points for conducting semi-structured interviews, with purposefully selected GPs. With this sequential approach we aimed to further enhance the understanding of the questionnaire data, and delved into the topics that emerged from the questionnaire responses.
RESULTS: In total, 46 GPs completed the online questionnaire (response rate 42%). Subsequent five semi-structured comprehensive interviews were conducted. GPs indicated that they frequently encounter the CSP in their daily practice and consider it important. They also emphasised it is important that GPs remain closely involved with the CSPs in the future. Nevertheless, GPs also repeatedly mentioned that they are not eager to take on more logistical/organizational tasks. They are however willing to empower CSPs in a positive manner.
CONCLUSIONS: GPs were generally positive about the CSPs and their current role within these programmes. Nevertheless, several options have been proposed to improve the CSPs, especially to increase screening uptake for populations in a socioeconomically disadvantaged position. Since it is of utmost importance to screen those who are most at risk of developing the screening-specific tumours, efforts should be made to achieve this goal.
摘要：
背景：在荷兰，针对宫颈癌组织了基于人群的癌症筛查计划(CSP)，乳腺癌和结直肠癌。为了使CSP有效，高参与率至关重要；然而，有一个令人震惊的下降趋势，包括筛查吸收的广泛区域差异。全科医生（GP）的参与可以对筛查参与产生刺激作用。然而，目前的GP参与是，limited,不同的方案之间有所不同，并随着时间的推移而变化。未探索的是全科医生对他们在CSP中的角色的看法。因此，这项研究的目的是绘制全科医生关于其在荷兰CSP中当前和未来角色的看法和信念。
方法：在荷兰的莱顿/海牙地区进行了混合方法顺序解释性研究，2021年底至2022年。编制了一份问卷，并在110名全科医生中分发。从问卷中获得的汇总结果作为进行半结构化访谈的起点，有目的地选择的全科医生。通过这种顺序方法，我们旨在进一步提高对问卷数据的理解，并深入研究了问卷答复中出现的主题。
结果：总计，46名全科医生完成了在线问卷（回复率为42%）。随后进行了五次半结构化的全面访谈。全科医生表示，他们在日常练习中经常遇到CSP，并认为这很重要。他们还强调，全科医生在未来与CSP保持密切联系是很重要的。然而，全科医生还反复提到，他们并不急于承担更多的后勤/组织任务。然而，他们愿意以积极的方式赋予CSP权力。
结论：全科医生普遍对CSP及其在这些计划中的当前作用持积极态度。然而，已经提出了几种方案来改进CSP，特别是增加对处于社会经济不利地位的人群的筛查。因为筛查那些最有可能发展为筛查特异性肿瘤的人是最重要的，应该努力实现这一目标。
方法：在荷兰的莱顿/海牙地区进行了混合方法顺序解释性研究，2021年底至2022年。编制了一份问卷，并在110名全科医生中分发。从问卷中获得的汇总结果作为进行半结构化访谈的起点，有目的地选择的全科医生。通过这种顺序方法，我们旨在进一步提高对问卷数据的理解，并深入研究了问卷答复中出现的主题。
结果：总计，46名全科医生完成了在线问卷（回复率为42%）。随后进行了五次半结构化的全面访谈。全科医生表示，他们在日常练习中经常遇到CSP，并认为这很重要。他们还强调，全科医生在未来与CSP保持密切联系是很重要的。然而，全科医生还反复提到，他们并不急于承担更多的后勤/组织任务。然而，他们愿意以积极的方式赋予CSP权力。
结论：全科医生普遍对CSP及其在这些计划中的当前作用持积极态度。然而，已经提出了几种方案来改进CSP，特别是增加对处于社会经济不利地位的人群的筛查。因为筛查那些最有可能发展为筛查特异性肿瘤的人是最重要的，应该努力实现这一目标。
