Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Feb;26(1):326-334.
doi: 10.1111/jep.13205. Epub 2019 Jun 13.

Lifestyle interventions for cancer prevention in primary care: Differences between family physicians and nursing professionals

María D Esteban-Vasallo  1 , Carmen García-Riolobos  1 , M Felicitas Domínguez-Berjón  1 , Ana Clara Zoni  1
Affiliations

Lifestyle interventions for cancer prevention in primary care: Differences between family physicians and nursing professionals

María D Esteban-Vasallo et al. J Eval Clin Pract. 2020 Feb.

Abstract

Rationale, aims, and objectives: Prevention offers the most cost-effective long-term strategy for cancer control. The objective of this study was to ascertain opinions, attitudes, and professional practices towards cancer prevention among primary care professionals and to assess differences between family physicians (FP) and nursing professionals (NP).

Method: A cross-sectional study was performed in 2012 in the Community of Madrid. A random sample of 3586 professionals received an online questionnaire about opinions/attitudes, training, and interventions in cancer prevention. The chi-square test was used to analyse the association of the profession with all the variables. Factors associated with the usual practice of individual, group, and community interventions were analysed using multivariate logistic regression, with separate models for FP and NP.

Results: The response rate was 39.4% (N = 1413). Approximately 90% of the participants attributed "sufficient/high" utility to individualized counselling. NP attributed higher utility to group and community interventions than FP (70.1% vs 60.1% and 64.9% vs 57.7%, respectively, P-value < 0.01). The usual practice of group and community interventions was more frequent among NP. The practice of group and community interventions was associated with knowledge of resources for prevention, specific training in group interventions, and the utility attributed to these methods. Among FP, the ability to dispense effective health advice and the utility attributed to this advice were associated with the usual practice of the three interventions.

Conclusions: Group and community interventions are rarely practised, especially among FP. Actions targeting improved ability and knowledge could lead to higher involvement in the promotion of health. It would also be necessary to intervene in the examination of the utility of such interventions.

Keywords: early detection of cancer; health education; neoplasms; online survey; primary health care; primary prevention.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:87-108.
    1. Patrones de mortalidad en España, 2013. MInisterio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad; Madrid, 2016.
    1. Informe del Estado de Salud de la Población, Comunidad de Madrid. Dirección General de Atención Primaria; Madrid, 2014.
    1. Bray F, Jemal A, Torre LA, Forman D, Vineis P. Long-term realism and cost-effectiveness: primary prevention in combatting cancer and associated inequalities worldwide. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015;107(12):djv273.
    1. WHO. Cancer. Fact sheet N° 297. WHO, Geneva, 2015. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs297/en/ (Accessed 12/02/2017)

LinkOut - more resources