Objectives: To identify what is known in the existing literature about the key components of an advanced nurse practitioner led high-risk family history breast clinic.
Methods: This scoping review adheres the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review framework and reported in line with the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. A systematic search of 4 databases including CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus and PsychINFO and sources of grey literature was conducted in October 2024 and December 2024. Data was extracted, synthesised and presented in narrative and table format.
Results: Seven papers met the inclusion criteria. Two themes emerged from the literature, risk assessment to determine breast cancer risk and the psychological impact of risk realisation on the patient and the nurse.
Conclusion: This scoping review aimed to identify the key components of an advanced nurse practitioner led high risk family history breast clinic. Two key components emerged from the literature namely risk assessment and the psychological impact of risk realisation. This review also identifies the recommended clinical outcomes following the identification of women at high risk for developing breast cancer. This review also aimed to identify the gaps in the literature regarding the role of the nurse within these clinics. The management of women identified to have psychological distress as a consequence of risk realisation.
Implications for nursing practice: Advanced nurse practitioners are well placed to lead the care of women at high-risk of developing breast cancer utilising a holistic approach, in conjunction with the multidisciplinary team.
Objective: Patients with hereditary colorectal cancer (HCRC) require consistent surveillance for both intestinal and extra-intestinal cancers. This study aims to develop a scale to measure variables associated with the intention of cancer surveillance behavior among patients with HCRC based on the Theory of Planned Behavior.
Methods: The preliminary scale was constructed using direct measures derived from a literature review, and belief-based indirect measures generated through a belief elicitation study involving 23 patients with HCRC. Then a sample of 134 patients was recruited to evaluated the validity and reliability of the scale.
Results: The finalized scale comprises 37 items with 4 subscales. The I-CVI ranged from 0.875 to 1.000, while the S-CVI/Ave for each subscale varied between 0.964 and 1.000. The Cronbach's α for the direct measures of each subscale ranged from 0.819 to 0.940. The intraclass correlation coefficient was between 0.609 and 0.893. Exploratory factor analysis revealed that the direct measures accounted for 80.133% of the variance. Convergent validity was established between the direct measures and the indirect measures (attitudes r = 0.469, P < .001; subjective norms r = 0.374, P < .001; perceived behavioral control r = 0.353, P < .001).
Conclusion: The scale demonstrates adequate construct validity, predictive validity, internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability, making it a valuable tool for assessing beliefs regarding cancer surveillance in patients with HCRC.
Implications for nursing practice: This newly developed scale will provide critical insights into how intentions influence actual cancer surveillance behavior among patients with HCRC. This understanding will facilitate the design of nursing interventions aimed at enhancing surveillance behaviors and long-term health outcomes.

