Adam Biran, Christina Dobson, Colin J Rees, Willie Hamilton, David Humes, Laura Jane Neilson, James Turvill, Christian von Wagner, John Whelpton, Linda Sharp
{"title":"患者的经验和期望粪便免疫化学测试调查结直肠癌症状:横断面定性访谈研究患者和从业者在英国。","authors":"Adam Biran, Christina Dobson, Colin J Rees, Willie Hamilton, David Humes, Laura Jane Neilson, James Turvill, Christian von Wagner, John Whelpton, Linda Sharp","doi":"10.1136/bmjopen-2024-093215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is now commonplace in the UK to prioritise symptomatic patients for urgent gastrointestinal investigation. The test requires a stool sample to be collected at home by the patient and returned for analysis. In this qualitative study, we sought to understand the feasibility and acceptability of FIT-based triage for patients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A cross-sectional, qualitative, experiential interview study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Recruitment was through three participating UK NHS sites (Yorkshire, Midlands, North-East). Health professionals were also identified through membership of the BSG/ACPGBI Symptomatic FIT Guideline Development Group and snowball sampling.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>We interviewed 21 patients who had completed FIT and been referred for colonoscopy and 30 primary and secondary care health professionals involved in symptomatic FIT delivery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Completion of FIT was unproblematic from the perspective of patients who returned the test. However, health professionals expressed concern over non-return. Among patients, understanding of the purpose of FIT and the meaning of results varied. Health professionals acknowledged that ensuring patient understanding of these can be challenging. Patients believed colonoscopy was less likely to miss cancer than FIT. Patients with a family or personal history of cancer were particularly anxious and wanted the reassurance of colonoscopy, even with a negative FIT result.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found no major barriers to the use of FIT in prioritising symptomatic patients for urgent investigation. Improving communication might increase compliance and, possibly, acceptability of non-referral for colonoscopy in the case of a negative test result.</p>","PeriodicalId":9158,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open","volume":"15 5","pages":"e093215"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12086939/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient experiences and expectations of faecal immunochemical testing for investigation of colorectal cancer symptoms: a cross-sectional qualitative interview study with patients and practitioners in the UK.\",\"authors\":\"Adam Biran, Christina Dobson, Colin J Rees, Willie Hamilton, David Humes, Laura Jane Neilson, James Turvill, Christian von Wagner, John Whelpton, Linda Sharp\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjopen-2024-093215\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is now commonplace in the UK to prioritise symptomatic patients for urgent gastrointestinal investigation. The test requires a stool sample to be collected at home by the patient and returned for analysis. In this qualitative study, we sought to understand the feasibility and acceptability of FIT-based triage for patients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A cross-sectional, qualitative, experiential interview study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Recruitment was through three participating UK NHS sites (Yorkshire, Midlands, North-East). Health professionals were also identified through membership of the BSG/ACPGBI Symptomatic FIT Guideline Development Group and snowball sampling.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>We interviewed 21 patients who had completed FIT and been referred for colonoscopy and 30 primary and secondary care health professionals involved in symptomatic FIT delivery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Completion of FIT was unproblematic from the perspective of patients who returned the test. However, health professionals expressed concern over non-return. Among patients, understanding of the purpose of FIT and the meaning of results varied. Health professionals acknowledged that ensuring patient understanding of these can be challenging. Patients believed colonoscopy was less likely to miss cancer than FIT. Patients with a family or personal history of cancer were particularly anxious and wanted the reassurance of colonoscopy, even with a negative FIT result.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found no major barriers to the use of FIT in prioritising symptomatic patients for urgent investigation. Improving communication might increase compliance and, possibly, acceptability of non-referral for colonoscopy in the case of a negative test result.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9158,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Open\",\"volume\":\"15 5\",\"pages\":\"e093215\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12086939/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-093215\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-093215","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Patient experiences and expectations of faecal immunochemical testing for investigation of colorectal cancer symptoms: a cross-sectional qualitative interview study with patients and practitioners in the UK.
Objectives: Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is now commonplace in the UK to prioritise symptomatic patients for urgent gastrointestinal investigation. The test requires a stool sample to be collected at home by the patient and returned for analysis. In this qualitative study, we sought to understand the feasibility and acceptability of FIT-based triage for patients.
Design: A cross-sectional, qualitative, experiential interview study.
Setting: Recruitment was through three participating UK NHS sites (Yorkshire, Midlands, North-East). Health professionals were also identified through membership of the BSG/ACPGBI Symptomatic FIT Guideline Development Group and snowball sampling.
Participants: We interviewed 21 patients who had completed FIT and been referred for colonoscopy and 30 primary and secondary care health professionals involved in symptomatic FIT delivery.
Results: Completion of FIT was unproblematic from the perspective of patients who returned the test. However, health professionals expressed concern over non-return. Among patients, understanding of the purpose of FIT and the meaning of results varied. Health professionals acknowledged that ensuring patient understanding of these can be challenging. Patients believed colonoscopy was less likely to miss cancer than FIT. Patients with a family or personal history of cancer were particularly anxious and wanted the reassurance of colonoscopy, even with a negative FIT result.
Conclusions: We found no major barriers to the use of FIT in prioritising symptomatic patients for urgent investigation. Improving communication might increase compliance and, possibly, acceptability of non-referral for colonoscopy in the case of a negative test result.
期刊介绍:
BMJ Open is an online, open access journal, dedicated to publishing medical research from all disciplines and therapeutic areas. The journal publishes all research study types, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialist studies. Publishing procedures are built around fully open peer review and continuous publication, publishing research online as soon as the article is ready.