Familial colonoscopic screening: how do French general practitioners deal with patients and their high-risk relatives. A qualitative study.

Isabelle Ingrand, Nicolas Palierne, Pauline Sarrazin, Yvan Desbordes, Clara Blanchard, Pierre Ingrand
{"title":"Familial colonoscopic screening: how do French general practitioners deal with patients and their high-risk relatives. A qualitative study.","authors":"Isabelle Ingrand,&nbsp;Nicolas Palierne,&nbsp;Pauline Sarrazin,&nbsp;Yvan Desbordes,&nbsp;Clara Blanchard,&nbsp;Pierre Ingrand","doi":"10.1080/13814788.2022.2089353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Screening of colorectal cancer (CRC) can reduce incidence and mortality. First-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with CRC or advanced adenoma before the age of 65 (index patients) are at increased risk of CRC; however, the guidelines for screening of FDRs by colonoscopy are poorly followed.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The present study, conducted in the context of the COLOR3 interventional study project, aimed to explore the positioning of general practitioners (GPs) in familial CRC screening in France.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From February 2020 to April 2021, 35 semi-structured interviews with GPs of index patients and/or their FDRs were conducted by telephone. The full-data transcribed corpus was subjected to horizontal thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Knowledge and compliance with the guidelines vary greatly between GPs. Although initiating the diagnostic process, GPs do not consider themselves as actors in the flow of information concerning familial risk. Their accompaniment of index patients in this role varies. GPs should overcome barriers to implementing colonoscopic screening for FDRs. They underline the importance of exploring family history, but they lack the time and doubt the reliability of the information given by FDRs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Challenges include circumventing gaps in knowledge, adherence to guidelines and improving family history updates. The GPs interviewed suggested personalised guidelines in specialists' reports to initiate information campaigns raising awareness of familial risk, and to enhance coordination between organised screening and familial screening.</p>","PeriodicalId":383035,"journal":{"name":"The European Journal of General Practice","volume":" ","pages":"182-190"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9272923/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The European Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2022.2089353","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Screening of colorectal cancer (CRC) can reduce incidence and mortality. First-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with CRC or advanced adenoma before the age of 65 (index patients) are at increased risk of CRC; however, the guidelines for screening of FDRs by colonoscopy are poorly followed.

Objectives: The present study, conducted in the context of the COLOR3 interventional study project, aimed to explore the positioning of general practitioners (GPs) in familial CRC screening in France.

Methods: From February 2020 to April 2021, 35 semi-structured interviews with GPs of index patients and/or their FDRs were conducted by telephone. The full-data transcribed corpus was subjected to horizontal thematic analysis.

Results: Knowledge and compliance with the guidelines vary greatly between GPs. Although initiating the diagnostic process, GPs do not consider themselves as actors in the flow of information concerning familial risk. Their accompaniment of index patients in this role varies. GPs should overcome barriers to implementing colonoscopic screening for FDRs. They underline the importance of exploring family history, but they lack the time and doubt the reliability of the information given by FDRs.

Conclusion: Challenges include circumventing gaps in knowledge, adherence to guidelines and improving family history updates. The GPs interviewed suggested personalised guidelines in specialists' reports to initiate information campaigns raising awareness of familial risk, and to enhance coordination between organised screening and familial screening.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
家族结肠镜筛查:法国全科医生如何处理患者及其高危亲属。定性研究。
背景:结直肠癌(CRC)筛查可以降低发病率和死亡率。65岁前结直肠癌或晚期腺瘤患者的一级亲属(FDRs)(指数患者)发生结直肠癌的风险增加;然而,结肠镜检查fdr的指南很少得到遵守。目的:本研究在COLOR3介入性研究项目的背景下进行,旨在探讨全科医生(gp)在法国家族性CRC筛查中的定位。方法:从2020年2月至2021年4月,通过电话对35例指数患者的全科医生和/或fdr进行半结构化访谈。对全数据转录的语料库进行横向专题分析。结果:全科医生对指南的了解和遵守程度差异很大。尽管启动了诊断过程,全科医生并不认为自己是关于家族风险的信息流中的参与者。他们对指标患者的陪伴作用各不相同。全科医生应克服实施结肠镜筛查fdr的障碍。他们强调了探索家族史的重要性,但他们缺乏时间,并且怀疑fdr提供的信息的可靠性。结论:面临的挑战包括克服知识空白、遵守指南和改善家族史更新。受访的全科医生建议在专家报告中提供个人化的指引,以开展宣传活动,提高对家庭风险的认识,并加强有组织筛查和家庭筛查之间的协调。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Survey of general practitioners' awareness, practice and perception of social prescribing across Europe. Person-centred care and its outcomes in primary care. Selected Abstracts from the 96th EGPRN Meeting, Split–Croatia, 11–14 May 2023 Research on integrated community care: Focus on general practitioners, patients and the population. Selected abstracts from the 95th EGPRN conference Antwerp, Belgium, 20–23 October 2022 Optimising the organisation of family medicine practice. Selected abstracts from the 94th EGPRN conference, Istanbul, Turkey, 12–15 May 2022 Fostering clinical research in general practice and family medicine. Selected abstracts from the 93rd EGPRN conference Halle, Germany, 14–17 October 2021
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1