孕妇对将宫颈癌筛查纳入荷兰产前保健的可行性的看法:一项问卷调查研究。

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Nick M A van der Hoeven, Adriaan J C van den Brule, Heleen J van Beekhuizen, Inge M C M de Kok, Maaike J M van de Sande, Marieke Biemans, Folkert J van Kemenade
{"title":"孕妇对将宫颈癌筛查纳入荷兰产前保健的可行性的看法:一项问卷调查研究。","authors":"Nick M A van der Hoeven, Adriaan J C van den Brule, Heleen J van Beekhuizen, Inge M C M de Kok, Maaike J M van de Sande, Marieke Biemans, Folkert J van Kemenade","doi":"10.1093/eurpub/ckaf121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dutch programmed cervical cancer screening starts at the age of 30, but efficacy is hampered due to low uptake, especially among youngest invitees aged 30-40 (< 50%). Currently, pregnant women are excluded from screening, but we hypothesize that participation could be increased if screening would be discussed routinely during obstetric care, motivating unscreened women to attend. Via this questionnaire study, we aimed to assess whether pregnant women in the Netherlands considered such \"antenatal screening\" acceptable.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In 2021 and 2022, a single written questionnaire was provided to pregnant women aged 30 years or older, undergoing obstetric care in the Rotterdam region, the Netherlands. Women were asked about previous screening attendance and perceived feasibility of antenatal screening, including benefits and harms. Primary outcome was the percentage of women considering antenatal screening feasible. Secondary outcomes included considered benefits and harms of antenatal screening and differences between adequately screened and un-/under screened women.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 372 out of 1511 (24.6%) returned the questionnaire. Among respondents 106 of 372 (28.5%) were un-/under screened. Of all responders, 78% considered introduction of antenatal screening a good idea, without difference among adequately screened (78.9%) vs un-/under screened women (75%; P = .25). Benefits of antenatal screening considered most by respondents were a feeling of reassurance (58.5%) and easier scheduling (37.0%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Introduction of cervical cancer screening via obstetric care is considered acceptable by a majority of pregnant women in the Netherlands. Benefits considered most were a feeling of reassurance and easier scheduling of attendance.</p>","PeriodicalId":12059,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Public Health","volume":" ","pages":"970-976"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12529266/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perspective of pregnant women on feasibility of integrating cervical cancer screening into antenatal care in the Netherlands: a questionnaire study.\",\"authors\":\"Nick M A van der Hoeven, Adriaan J C van den Brule, Heleen J van Beekhuizen, Inge M C M de Kok, Maaike J M van de Sande, Marieke Biemans, Folkert J van Kemenade\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/eurpub/ckaf121\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dutch programmed cervical cancer screening starts at the age of 30, but efficacy is hampered due to low uptake, especially among youngest invitees aged 30-40 (< 50%). Currently, pregnant women are excluded from screening, but we hypothesize that participation could be increased if screening would be discussed routinely during obstetric care, motivating unscreened women to attend. Via this questionnaire study, we aimed to assess whether pregnant women in the Netherlands considered such \\\"antenatal screening\\\" acceptable.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In 2021 and 2022, a single written questionnaire was provided to pregnant women aged 30 years or older, undergoing obstetric care in the Rotterdam region, the Netherlands. Women were asked about previous screening attendance and perceived feasibility of antenatal screening, including benefits and harms. Primary outcome was the percentage of women considering antenatal screening feasible. Secondary outcomes included considered benefits and harms of antenatal screening and differences between adequately screened and un-/under screened women.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 372 out of 1511 (24.6%) returned the questionnaire. Among respondents 106 of 372 (28.5%) were un-/under screened. Of all responders, 78% considered introduction of antenatal screening a good idea, without difference among adequately screened (78.9%) vs un-/under screened women (75%; P = .25). Benefits of antenatal screening considered most by respondents were a feeling of reassurance (58.5%) and easier scheduling (37.0%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Introduction of cervical cancer screening via obstetric care is considered acceptable by a majority of pregnant women in the Netherlands. Benefits considered most were a feeling of reassurance and easier scheduling of attendance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12059,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Public Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"970-976\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12529266/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckaf121\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckaf121","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:荷兰计划的宫颈癌筛查从30岁开始,但由于吸收率低,特别是在30-40岁的最年轻的被邀请者中(< 50%),效果受到阻碍。目前,孕妇被排除在筛查之外,但我们假设,如果在产科护理期间常规讨论筛查,激励未接受筛查的妇女参加筛查,那么参与筛查的人数可能会增加。通过这项问卷研究,我们旨在评估荷兰的孕妇是否认为这种“产前筛查”是可以接受的。方法:在2021年和2022年,向荷兰鹿特丹地区30岁及以上接受产科护理的孕妇提供一份单一的书面问卷。妇女被问及以前的筛查出勤率和产前筛查的可行性,包括益处和危害。主要结果是认为产前筛查可行的妇女百分比。次要结局包括产前筛查的益处和危害,以及充分筛查和未筛查/未筛查妇女之间的差异。结果:1511人中,共有372人回复问卷,占24.6%。在受访者中,372人中有106人(28.5%)未接受或未接受筛查。在所有应答者中,78%的人认为产前筛查是一个好主意,充分筛查(78.9%)与未筛查/未筛查的妇女(75%;p = .25)。受访者认为产前筛查的最大好处是感到放心(58.5%)和更容易安排(37.0%)。结论:在荷兰,大多数孕妇认为通过产科护理引入宫颈癌筛查是可以接受的。考虑最多的好处是一种安心的感觉和更容易安排出勤。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Perspective of pregnant women on feasibility of integrating cervical cancer screening into antenatal care in the Netherlands: a questionnaire study.

Background: Dutch programmed cervical cancer screening starts at the age of 30, but efficacy is hampered due to low uptake, especially among youngest invitees aged 30-40 (< 50%). Currently, pregnant women are excluded from screening, but we hypothesize that participation could be increased if screening would be discussed routinely during obstetric care, motivating unscreened women to attend. Via this questionnaire study, we aimed to assess whether pregnant women in the Netherlands considered such "antenatal screening" acceptable.

Methods: In 2021 and 2022, a single written questionnaire was provided to pregnant women aged 30 years or older, undergoing obstetric care in the Rotterdam region, the Netherlands. Women were asked about previous screening attendance and perceived feasibility of antenatal screening, including benefits and harms. Primary outcome was the percentage of women considering antenatal screening feasible. Secondary outcomes included considered benefits and harms of antenatal screening and differences between adequately screened and un-/under screened women.

Results: In total, 372 out of 1511 (24.6%) returned the questionnaire. Among respondents 106 of 372 (28.5%) were un-/under screened. Of all responders, 78% considered introduction of antenatal screening a good idea, without difference among adequately screened (78.9%) vs un-/under screened women (75%; P = .25). Benefits of antenatal screening considered most by respondents were a feeling of reassurance (58.5%) and easier scheduling (37.0%).

Conclusions: Introduction of cervical cancer screening via obstetric care is considered acceptable by a majority of pregnant women in the Netherlands. Benefits considered most were a feeling of reassurance and easier scheduling of attendance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Public Health
European Journal of Public Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
2.30%
发文量
2039
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Public Health (EJPH) is a multidisciplinary journal aimed at attracting contributions from epidemiology, health services research, health economics, social sciences, management sciences, ethics and law, environmental health sciences, and other disciplines of relevance to public health. The journal provides a forum for discussion and debate of current international public health issues, with a focus on the European Region. Bi-monthly issues contain peer-reviewed original articles, editorials, commentaries, book reviews, news, letters to the editor, announcements of events, and various other features.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信