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
. 2021 Jan 23;21(1):205.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10210-3.

Incorporating a brief intervention for personalised cancer risk assessment to promote behaviour change into primary care: a multi-methods pilot study

Affiliations

Incorporating a brief intervention for personalised cancer risk assessment to promote behaviour change into primary care: a multi-methods pilot study

Katie Mills et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: Approximately 40% of cancers could be prevented if people lived healthier lifestyles. We have developed a theory-based brief intervention to share personalised cancer risk information and promote behaviour change within primary care. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of incorporating this intervention into primary care consultations.

Method: Patients eligible for an NHS Health Check or annual chronic disease review at five general practices were invited to participate in a non-randomised pilot study. In addition to the NHS Health Check or chronic disease review, those receiving the intervention were provided with their estimated risk of developing the most common preventable cancers alongside tailored behaviour change advice. Patients completed online questionnaires at baseline, immediately post-consultation and at 3-month follow-up. Consultations were audio/video recorded. Patients (n = 12) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) (n = 7) participated in post-intervention qualitative interviews that were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results: 62 patients took part. Thirty-four attended for an NHS Health Check plus the intervention; 7 for a standard NHS Health Check; 16 for a chronic disease review plus the intervention; and 5 for a standard chronic disease review. The mean time for delivery of the intervention was 9.6 min (SD 3) within NHS Health Checks and 9 min (SD 4) within chronic disease reviews. Fidelity of delivery of the intervention was high. Data from the questionnaires demonstrates potential improvements in health-related behaviours following the intervention. Patients receiving the intervention found the cancer risk information and lifestyle advice understandable, useful and motivating. HCPs felt that the intervention fitted well within NHS Health Checks and facilitated conversations around behaviour change. Integrating the intervention within chronic disease reviews was more challenging.

Conclusions: Incorporating a risk-based intervention to promote behaviour change for cancer prevention into primary care consultations is feasible and acceptable to both patients and HCPs. A randomised trial is now needed to assess the effect on health behaviours. When designing that trial, and other prevention activities within primary care, it is necessary to consider challenges around patient recruitment, the HCP contact time needed for delivery of interventions, and how best to integrate discussions about disease risk within routine care.

Keywords: Behaviour change; Cancer; Pilot study; Primary care; Risk assessment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None of the authors have competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Recruitment flow chart
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Fidelity of intervention delivery

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Cancer Research UK. Cancer statistics. http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics.
    1. Cancer Research UK Statistics on preventable cancers. http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/ri.... Accessed 9 Aug 2016.
    1. Public Health England . NHS Health Check Best practice guidance. 2015.
    1. French DP, Cameron E, Benton JS, Deaton C, Harvie M. Can communicating personalised disease risk promote healthy behaviour change? A systematic review of systematic reviews. Ann Behav Med. 2017;51:718–729. doi: 10.1007/s12160-017-9895-z. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Usher-Smith J, Silarova B, Sharp SJ, Mills K, Griffin SJ. Effect of interventions incorporating personalised cancer risk information on intentions and behaviour: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ Open. 2018;8:e017717. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017717. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types