Should I take aspirin? A qualitative study on the implementation of a decision aid on taking aspirin for bowel cancer prevention.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
Shakira Onwuka, Jennifer McIntosh, Lucy Boyd, Napin Karnchanachari, Finlay Macrae, George Fishman, Jon Emery
{"title":"Should I take aspirin? A qualitative study on the implementation of a decision aid on taking aspirin for bowel cancer prevention.","authors":"Shakira Onwuka, Jennifer McIntosh, Lucy Boyd, Napin Karnchanachari, Finlay Macrae, George Fishman, Jon Emery","doi":"10.1136/fmch-2023-002423","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Australian guidelines recommend 50-70 years consider taking aspirin to reduce their bowel cancer risk. We trialled a decision aid in general practice to facilitate the implementation of these guidelines into clinical practice. This publication reports on the qualitative results from the process evaluation of the trial. We aimed to explore general practitioners' (GPs) and their patients' approach to shared decision-making (SDM) about taking aspirin to prevent bowel cancer and how the decision aids were used in practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Semistructured interviews were conducted with 17 participants who received the decision aid and 12 GPs who participated in the trial between June and November 2021. The interviews were coded inductively, and emerging themes were mapped onto the Revised Programme Theory for SDM.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study highlighted the dynamics of SDM for taking aspirin to prevent bowel cancer. Some participants discussed the decision aid with their GPs as advised prior to taking aspirin, others either took aspirin or dismissed it outright without discussing it with their GPs. Notably, participants' trust in their GPs, and participants' diverse worldviews played pivotal roles in their decisions. Although the decision aid supported SDM for some, it was not always prioritised in a consultation. This was likely impacted during the trial period as the COVID-19 pandemic was the focus for general practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In summary, this study illustrated the complexities of SDM through using a decision aid in general practice to implement the guidelines for low-dose aspirin to prevent bowel cancer. While the decision aid prompted some participants to speak to their GPs, they were also heavily influenced by their unwavering trust in the GPs and their different worldviews. In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, SDM was not highly prioritised. This study provides insights into the implementation of guidelines into clinical practice and highlights the need for ongoing support and prioritisation of cancer prevention in general practice consultations.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>ACTRN12620001003965.</p>","PeriodicalId":44590,"journal":{"name":"Family Medicine and Community Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10689404/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Medicine and Community Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2023-002423","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Australian guidelines recommend 50-70 years consider taking aspirin to reduce their bowel cancer risk. We trialled a decision aid in general practice to facilitate the implementation of these guidelines into clinical practice. This publication reports on the qualitative results from the process evaluation of the trial. We aimed to explore general practitioners' (GPs) and their patients' approach to shared decision-making (SDM) about taking aspirin to prevent bowel cancer and how the decision aids were used in practice.

Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 17 participants who received the decision aid and 12 GPs who participated in the trial between June and November 2021. The interviews were coded inductively, and emerging themes were mapped onto the Revised Programme Theory for SDM.

Results: The study highlighted the dynamics of SDM for taking aspirin to prevent bowel cancer. Some participants discussed the decision aid with their GPs as advised prior to taking aspirin, others either took aspirin or dismissed it outright without discussing it with their GPs. Notably, participants' trust in their GPs, and participants' diverse worldviews played pivotal roles in their decisions. Although the decision aid supported SDM for some, it was not always prioritised in a consultation. This was likely impacted during the trial period as the COVID-19 pandemic was the focus for general practice.

Conclusion: In summary, this study illustrated the complexities of SDM through using a decision aid in general practice to implement the guidelines for low-dose aspirin to prevent bowel cancer. While the decision aid prompted some participants to speak to their GPs, they were also heavily influenced by their unwavering trust in the GPs and their different worldviews. In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, SDM was not highly prioritised. This study provides insights into the implementation of guidelines into clinical practice and highlights the need for ongoing support and prioritisation of cancer prevention in general practice consultations.

Trial registration number: ACTRN12620001003965.

我应该吃阿司匹林吗?服用阿司匹林预防肠癌决策辅助实施的定性研究。
目的:澳大利亚指南建议50-70岁的人考虑服用阿司匹林来降低肠癌的风险。我们在全科实践中试用了一种决策辅助工具,以促进这些指南在临床实践中的实施。本出版物报道了试验过程评估的定性结果。我们的目的是探讨全科医生(gp)和他们的患者在服用阿司匹林预防肠癌方面的共同决策(SDM)方法,以及决策辅助工具在实践中的使用情况。方法:在2021年6月至11月期间,对17名接受决策辅助的参与者和12名参与试验的全科医生进行半结构化访谈。访谈被归纳编码,新出现的主题被映射到SDM的修订计划理论。结果:该研究强调了服用阿司匹林预防肠癌的SDM动力学。一些参与者在服用阿司匹林之前与他们的全科医生讨论了建议的决策辅助,其他人要么服用阿司匹林,要么在没有与全科医生讨论的情况下完全放弃服用阿司匹林。值得注意的是,参与者对全科医生的信任以及参与者不同的世界观在他们的决策中发挥了关键作用。虽然决策援助对一些国家支持可持续发展机制,但它并不总是在协商中被列为优先事项。这在试验期间可能会受到影响,因为COVID-19大流行是一般实践的重点。结论:总之,本研究通过在一般实践中使用决策辅助来实施低剂量阿司匹林预防肠癌的指南,说明了SDM的复杂性。虽然决策援助促使一些参与者与他们的全科医生交谈,但他们也受到对全科医生坚定不移的信任和不同世界观的严重影响。面对COVID-19大流行,SDM没有得到高度重视。本研究为指南在临床实践中的实施提供了见解,并强调了在全科医生咨询中持续支持和优先考虑癌症预防的必要性。试验注册号:ACTRN12620001003965。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Family Medicine and Community Health (FMCH) is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal focusing on the topics of family medicine, general practice and community health. FMCH strives to be a leading international journal that promotes ‘Health Care for All’ through disseminating novel knowledge and best practices in primary care, family medicine, and community health. FMCH publishes original research, review, methodology, commentary, reflection, and case-study from the lens of population health. FMCH’s Asian Focus section features reports of family medicine development in the Asia-pacific region. FMCH aims to be an exemplary forum for the timely communication of medical knowledge and skills with the goal of promoting improved health care through the practice of family and community-based medicine globally. FMCH aims to serve a diverse audience including researchers, educators, policymakers and leaders of family medicine and community health. We also aim to provide content relevant for researchers working on population health, epidemiology, public policy, disease control and management, preventative medicine and disease burden. FMCH does not impose any article processing charges (APC) or submission charges.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信