In two minds about screening: an investigation of cervical cancer prevention among Irish women

Cervical cancer is the second most common female cancer worldwide. Cervical screening programmes can reduce the incidence of cervical cancer by up to 80 percent if the invited women participate. Previous Irish research has associated screening attendance with subjective norms, anticipated regret, higher socio-economic status and education. Greater perceived screening barriers and lacking knowledge were associated with avoidance. These findings support a variety of expectancy-value theories of behaviour. They also suggest that expectancy-value theories could benefit from the inclusion of affective predictors of behaviour, like anticipated regret. In 2008 the Republic of Ireland introduced the National Cervical Screening Programme (NCSP). This research seeks to identify the predictors of participation in the NCSP. A systematic review of reviews showed that predictors of screening participation clustered into environmental and psychological influences. There is a gap in the evidence synthesis of associations with personal characteristics and health beliefs. Thematic analysis of focus group interviews confirmed the validity of many screening predictors identified by the systematic review and expectancy-value theories. A survey of these predictors suggested that reduced screening barriers might encourage first-time participation, while regular attendance requires greater endorsement of screening benefits and stronger subjective norm and intention. Positive attitude, rather than knowledge, appeared to be crucial for strong intention, so the final study piloted an experiment comparing the utility of positive attitude in strengthening intention to the utility of information provision. Despite lacking significant differences between conditions, content analysis of participant comments suggested that a full trial would be worthwhile, given purposive sampling and improved sample retention. These findings agree with previous Irish research on the importance of screening intention, although its association with attitude appeared to be stronger in the present research. The findings further indicate that future screening promotion should consider interventions based on patients’ experiences of screening.

The knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of patients and their healthcare professionals around oral dosage form modification: a systematic review of the qualitative literature

Objectives: The objective of this systematic review was to synthesize the available qualitative evidence on the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of adult patients, healthcare professionals and carers about oral dosage form modification. Design: A systematic review and synthesis of qualitative studies was undertaken, utilising the thematic synthesis approach. Data sources: The following databases were searched from inception to September 2015: PubMed, Medline (EBSCO), EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, ProQuest Databases, Scopus, Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). Citation tracking and searching the references lists of included studies was also undertaken. Grey literature was searched using the OpenGrey database, internet searching and personal knowledge. An updated search was undertaken in June 2016. Review methods: Studies meeting the following criteria were eligible for inclusion; (i) used qualitative data collection and analysis methods; (ii) full-text was available in English; (iii) included adult patients who require oral dosage forms to be modified to meet their needs or; (iv) carers or healthcare professionals of patients who require oral dosage forms to be modified. Two reviewers independently appraised the quality of the included studies using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Checklist. A thematic synthesis was conducted and analytical themes were generated. Results: Of 5455 records screened, seven studies were eligible for inclusion; three involved healthcare professionals and the remaining four studies involved patients. Four analytical themes emerged from the thematic synthesis: (i) patient-centred individuality and variability; (ii) communication; (iii) knowledge and uncertainty and; (iv) complexity. The variability of individual patient’s requirements, poor communication practices and lack of knowledge about oral dosage form modification, when combined with the complex and multi-faceted healthcare environment complicate decision making regarding oral dosage form modification and administration. Conclusions: This systematic review has highlighted the key factors influencing the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of patients and healthcare professionals about oral dosage form modifications. The findings suggest that in order to optimise oral medicine modification practices the needs of individual patients should be routinely and systematically assessed and decision-making should be supported by evidence based recommendations with multidisciplinary input. Further research is needed to optimise oral dosage form modification practices and the factors identified in this review should be considered in the development of future interventions.