Satisfaction with remote consultations in primary care during COVID-19: a population survey of UK adults.

BACKGROUND: Mode of access to primary care changed during the COVID-19 pandemic; remote consultations became more widespread. With remote consultations likely to continue in UK primary care, it is important to understand people's perceptions of remote consultations and identify potential resulting inequalities. AIM: To assess satisfaction with remote GP consultations in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic and identify demographic variation in satisfaction levels. DESIGN AND SETTING: A cross-sectional survey from the second phase of a large UK-based study, which was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: In total, 1426 adults who self-reported having sought help from their doctor in the past 6 months completed an online questionnaire (February to March 2021). Items included satisfaction with remote consultations and demographic variables. Associations were analysed using multivariable regression. RESULTS: A novel six-item scale of satisfaction with remote GP consultations had good psychometric properties. Participants with higher levels of education had significantly greater satisfaction with remote consultations than participants with mid-level qualifications (B = -0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.41 to -0.23) or those with low or no qualifications (B = -1.65, 95% CI = -2.29 to -1.02). People living in Wales reported significantly higher satisfaction compared with those living in Scotland (B = -1.94, 95% CI = -3.11 to -0.78), although caution is warranted due to small group numbers. CONCLUSION: These findings can inform the use and adaptation of remote consultations in primary care. Adults with lower educational levels may need additional support to improve their experience and ensure equitable care via remote consultations.

UK Women's Views of the Concepts of Personalised Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Risk-Stratified Breast Screening: A Qualitative Interview Study.

Any introduction of risk-stratification within the NHS Breast Screening Programme needs to be considered acceptable by women. We conducted interviews to explore women's attitudes to personalised risk assessment and risk-stratified breast screening. Twenty-five UK women were purposively sampled by screening experience and socioeconomic background. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analysed using Framework Analysis. Women expressed positive intentions for personal risk assessment and willingness to receive risk feedback to provide reassurance and certainty. Women responded to risk-stratified screening scenarios in three ways: 'Overall acceptors' considered both high- and low-risk options acceptable as a reasonable allocation of resources to clinical need, yet acceptability was subject to specified conditions including accuracy of risk estimates and availability of support throughout the screening pathway. Others who thought 'more is better' only supported high-risk scenarios where increased screening was proposed. 'Screening sceptics' found low-risk scenarios more aligned to their screening values than high-risk screening options. Consideration of screening recommendations for other risk groups had more influence on women's responses than screening-related harms. These findings demonstrate high, but not universal, acceptability. Support and guidance, tailored to screening values and preferences, may be required by women at all levels of risk.

Targeted encouragement of GP consultations for possible cancer symptoms: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: For some common cancers, survival is lower in the UK than in comparable high-income countries. AIM: To assess the effectiveness of a targeted postal intervention (to promote awareness of cancer symptoms and earlier help seeking) on patient consultation rates. DESIGN AND SETTING: A two-arm randomised controlled trial was carried out on patients aged 50-84 years registered at 23 general practices in rural and urban areas of Greater London, Greater Manchester, and the North East of England. METHOD: Patients who had not had a consultation at their general practice in the previous 12 months and had at least two other risk factors for late presentation with cancer were randomised to intervention and control arms. The intervention consisted of a posted letter and leaflet. Primary outcome was the number of consultations at the practice with patients randomised to each arm in the 6 months subsequent to posting the intervention. All patients with outcome data were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. RESULTS: In total, 1513 patients were individually randomised to the intervention (n = 783) and control (n = 730) arms between Nov 2016 - May 2017; outcome data were available for 749 and 705 patients, respectively, with a statistically significantly higher rate of consultation in the intervention arm compared with the control arm: 436 versus 335 consultations (relative risk 1.40, 95% confidence interval = 1.11 to 1.77, P = 0.004). There was, however, no difference in the numbers of patients consulting. CONCLUSION: Targeted interventions of this nature can change behaviour; there is a need to develop interventions that can be more effective at engaging patients with primary care. This study demonstrates that targeted interventions promoting both awareness of possible cancer symptoms and earlier health seeking, can change behaviour. There is a need to develop and test interventions that can be more effective at engaging the most at-risk patients.

Acceptability of receiving lifestyle advice at cervical, breast and bowel cancer screening.

Cancer screening could be an opportunity to deliver cancer prevention advice, but it is not known how such information would be received. We explored willingness to receive lifestyle advice in the context of the English National Health Service cervical, breast, and bowel (FS; flexible sigmoidoscopy) screening programmes. A population-based survey was conducted in 2016 to collect nationally representative data on willingness to receive lifestyle advice across cervical (n = 768), breast (n = 420) and FS (n = 308) screening programmes. Additional items assessed the impact of lifestyle advice on screening attendance, preference for receiving advice in the event of an abnormal screening result, and timing of advice. Most respondents were willing to receive lifestyle advice around the time of cancer screening (cervical 78.9%, breast 79.4%, FS 81.8%), and if their results were abnormal (cervical 86.3%, breast 83.0%, FS 85.1%). A small proportion indicated it may discourage future attendance (cervical 4.9%, breast 7.0%, FS 8.8%). Most preferred information to be delivered at the screening appointment (cervical 69.8%, breast 72.6%, FS 70.7%). There were no associations between sociodemographic characteristics and willingness to receive lifestyle advice at breast screening. For those intending to attend cervical screening, non-White ethnicity and higher education were associated with increased willingness to receive lifestyle advice. Women were more likely to be willing to receive advice at FS screening than men. Providing lifestyle advice at cancer screening is likely to be acceptable to the general population. The optimal approach for delivery needs careful consideration to minimise potential negative effects on screening attendance.

Socio-economic variations in anticipated adverse reactions to testing HPV positive: Implications for the introduction of primary HPV-based cervical screening.

Some cervical cancer screening programmes are replacing cytology with human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing as the primary screening test. Concerns have been previously raised around the potential psychosocial impact of testing positive for HPV. We analysed socio-economic variations in anticipated adverse reactions to testing positive for HPV in women of screening age in the general population. A questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 5553 women aged 20-64 in 2010, selected through primary care in Ireland. This included questions on: socio-economics; HPV knowledge; and women's anticipated adverse psychosocial responses to testing HPV positive (shame, anxiety, stigma and worry). Multivariable linear regression was used to identify socio-economic factors significantly associated with each anticipated adverse reaction. The response rate was 62% (n = 3470). In multivariate analyses, having only attained primary level education were significantly associated with higher mean scores for all four adverse outcomes. Religion was significantly associated with all four adverse outcomes. Age was associated with anxiety and worry; younger women (<30 years) had the highest mean scores. Being married/cohabiting was significantly associated with significantly lower shame and worry scores. Not working was significantly associated with higher mean anxiety and worry scores. Our large population-based survey found significant socio-economic variations in anticipated adverse reactions to testing HPV positive. In order to minimise possible negative impacts on screening uptake and alleviate potential adverse psychological effects of HPV-based screening on women, screening programmes may need to develop specific messages around HPV infection and HPV screening that target certain subgroups of women.

Attitudes towards a programme of risk assessment and stratified management for ovarian cancer: a focus group study of UK South Asians' perspectives.

OBJECTIVE: Population-based risk assessment, using genetic testing and the provision of appropriate risk management, could lead to prevention, early detection and improved clinical management of ovarian cancer (OC). Previous research with mostly white British participants found positive attitudes towards such a programme. The current study aimed to explore the attitudes of South Asian (SA) women and men in the UK with the aim of identifying how best to implement such a programme to minimise distress and maximise uptake. DESIGN: Semistructured qualitative focus group discussions. SETTING: Community centres across North London and Luton. PARTICIPANTS: 49 women and 13 men who identified as SA (Indian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi), which constitutes the largest non-European ethnic minority group in the UK. METHODS: Seven community-based focus groups were held. Group discussions were transcribed verbatim, coded and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Awareness and knowledge of OC symptoms and specific risk factors was low. The programme was acceptable to most participants and attitudes to it were generally positive. Participants' main concerns related to receiving a high-risk result following the genetic test. Younger women may be more cautious of genetic testing, screening or risk-reducing surgery due to the importance of marriage and childbearing in their SA cultures. CONCLUSIONS: A crucial first step to enable implementation of population-based genetic risk assessment and management in OC is to raise awareness of OC within SA communities. It will be important to engage with the SA community early on in programme implementation to address their specific concerns and to ensure culturally tailored decision support.

Assessing the acceptability of incentivising HPV vaccination consent form return as a means of increasing uptake.

BACKGROUND: Uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is high overall but there are disparities in uptake, particularly by ethnicity. Incentivising vaccination consent form return is a promising approach to increase vaccination uptake. As part of a randomised feasibility trial we qualitatively assessed the acceptability of increasing uptake of HPV vaccination by incentivising consent form return. METHODS: In the context of a two-arm, cluster randomised feasibility trial, qualitative free-text questionnaire responses were collected from adolescent girls (n = 181) and their parents (n = 61), assessing the acceptability of an incentive intervention to increase HPV vaccination consent form return. In the incentive intervention arm, girls who returned a signed consent form (regardless of whether consent was given or refused), had a 1-in-10 chance of winning a £50 shopping voucher. Telephone interviews were also conducted with members of staff from participating schools (n = 6), assessing the acceptability of the incentive. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Girls and parents provided a mix of positive, negative and ambivalent responses about the use of the incentive to encourage HPV vaccination consent form return. Both girls and parents held misconceptions about the nature of the incentive, wrongly believing that the incentive was dependent on vaccination receipt rather than consent form return. School staff members also expressed a mix of opinions on the acceptability of the incentive, including perceptions of effectiveness and ethics. CONCLUSIONS: The use of an incentive intervention to encourage the return of HPV vaccination consent forms was found to be moderately acceptable to those receiving and delivering the intervention, although a number of changes are required to improve this. In particular, improving communication about the nature of the incentive to reduce misconceptions is vital. These findings suggest that incentivising consent form return may be an acceptable means of improving HPV vaccination rates, should improvements be made. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry; ISRCTN72136061 , 26 September 2016, retrospectively registered.

Effect of HPV vaccination and cervical cancer screening in England by ethnicity: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Health equality is increasingly being considered alongside overall health gain when assessing public health interventions. However, the trade-off between the direct effects of vaccination and herd immunity could lead to unintuitive consequences for the distribution of disease burden within a population. We used a transmission dynamic model of human papillomavirus (HPV) to investigate the effect of ethnic disparities in vaccine and cervical screening uptake on inequality in disease incidence in England. METHODS: We developed an individual-based model of HPV transmission and disease, parameterising it with the latest data for sexual behaviour (from National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles [Natsal-3]) and vaccine and screening uptake by ethnicity (from Public Health England [PHE]) and fitting it to data for HPV prevalence (from ARTISTIC, PHE, Natsal-3) and HPV-related disease incidence (from National Cancer Registry [ONS]). The outcome of interest was the age-adjusted incidence of HPV-related cancer (both cervical and non-cervical) in all women in England in view of differences and changes in vaccination and screening uptake by ethnicity in England, over time. We also studied three potential public health interventions aimed at reducing inequality in HPV-related disease incidence: increasing uptake in black and Asian females to match that in whites for vaccination; cervical screening in women who turn 25 in 2018 or later; and cervical screening in all ages. FINDINGS: In the pre-vaccination era, before 2008, women from ethnic minorities in England reported a disproportionate share of cervical disease. Our model suggests that Asian women were 1·7 times (95% credibility interval [CI] 1·1-2·7) more likely to be diagnosed with cervical cancer than white women (22·8 vs 13·4 cases per 100 000 women). Because HPV vaccination uptake is lower in ethnic minorities, we predict an initial widening of this gap, with cervical cancer incidence in Asian women up to 2·5 times higher (95% CI 1·3-4·8) than in white women 20 years after vaccine introduction (corresponding to an additional 10·8 [95% CI 10·1-11·5] cases every year). In time, we predict that herd immunity benefits will diffuse from the larger white sub-population and the disparity will narrow. Increased cervical screening uptake in vaccinated women from ethnic minorities would lead to rapid improvement in equality with parity in incidence after 20 years of HPV vaccination. INTERPRETATION: Our study suggests that the introduction of HPV vaccination in England will initially widen a pre-existing disparity in the incidence of HPV-related cancer by ethnicity, partly due to herd immunity disproportionately benefiting subgroups with high vaccination rates. Although in time this induced disparity will narrow, increasing cervical screening uptake in girls from ethnic minorities should be encouraged to eliminate the inequality in cervical cancer incidence in the medium term. We recommend that dynamic effects should be considered when estimating the effect of public health programmes on equality. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

Role of ethnicity in human papillomavirus vaccination uptake: a cross-sectional study of girls from ethnic minority groups attending London schools.

OBJECTIVES: Research suggests that girls from ethnic minority groups are less likely to receive the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination than white British girls; however, the specific ethnic minority groups that have lower uptake have not been identified. This study aimed to examine the relationship between school-level uptake and ethnicity as well as uptake and other ethnicity-related factors, to understand which specific groups are less likely to receive the vaccination. METHODS: Aggregated uptake rates from 195 schools were obtained for each of the three recommended vaccine doses from 2008 to 2010. Census data at the lower super output area (LSOA) level for the postcode of each school were also obtained, describing the ethnic breakdown of the resident population (ethnicity, language spoken, religion, proficiency in English and duration of residency in the UK). These were used as proxy measures of the ethnic make-up of the schools. The most prevalent non-majority group for each ethnicity and ethnicity-related factor was assigned to each school. Analyses explored differences in uptake by ethnicity and ethnicity-related factors. RESULTS: No significant differences in vaccination uptake were found by ethnicity or ethnicity-related factors, although descriptive differences were apparent. Schools in areas where black ethnicities were the most prevalent non-white British ethnicities had consistently low rates of uptake for all doses. Schools in areas where some Asian ethnicities were the most prevalent non-white British ethnicities had consistently high rates of uptake for all doses. There was evidence of variability in mean uptake rates for ethnicities within 'black' and 'Asian' ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Future research would benefit from focusing on specific ethnicities rather than broad ethnic categories. Replication of this study with a larger sample and using complete individual-level data, collected on a national level, would provide a clearer indication of where ethnic differences in HPV vaccination uptake exist.

Taking stock and looking ahead: Behavioural science lessons for implementing the nonavalent human papillomavirus vaccine.

The development and licensing of a nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality from HPV-related cancers beyond that of first generation HPV vaccines. However, this benefit can only be realised if the offer of vaccination is accepted. Uptake of first generation HPV vaccines is not complete and shows huge global variation. In addition to practical and financial challenges to optimising coverage, behavioural issues explain a large proportion of the variance in vaccine receipt. This commentary draws on the findings of over a decade of behavioural science research seeking to understand uptake of first generation HPV vaccines, in order to anticipate challenges to implement the nonavalent HPV vaccine. Challenges include distrust of combination vaccines, uncertainty about long-term efficacy, distrust of a new and (perceived to be) untested vaccine, cost and uncertainty regarding interchanging doses of first generation and nonavalent vaccines and the appropriateness of revaccination. We use behavioural science theory and existing evaluations of interventions to increase uptake of vaccines to identify evidence-based approaches that can be implemented by vaccine stakeholders to address parents' concerns and maximise uptake of the nonavalent HPV vaccine.

Socioeconomic inequalities in breast and cervical screening coverage in England: are we closing the gap?

OBJECTIVE: Health policy in the UK is committed to tackling inequalities in cancer screening participation. We examined whether socioeconomic inequalities in breast and cervical cancer screening participation in England have reduced over five years. METHODS: Cross-sectional analyses compared cervical and breast screening coverage between 2007/8 and 2012/13 in Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) in England in relation to area-level income deprivation. RESULTS: At the start and the end of this five year period, there were socioeconomic inequalities in screening coverage for breast and cervical screening. Inequalities were highest for breast screening. Over time, the coverage gap between the highest and lowest quintiles of income deprivation significantly reduced for breast screening (from 12.3 to 8.3 percentage points), but not for cervical screening (5.3 to 4.9 percentage points). CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to reduce screening inequalities appear to have resulted in a significant improvement in equitable delivery of breast screening, although not of cervical screening. More work is needed to understand the differences, and see whether broader lessons can be learned from the reduction of inequalities in breast screening participation.

Social Cognitive Mediators of Sociodemographic Differences in Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake.

BACKGROUND: This study examined if and how sociodemographic differences in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake can be explained by social cognitive factors. METHODS: Face-to-face interviews were conducted with individuals aged 60-70 years (n = 1309) living in England as part of a population-based omnibus survey. RESULTS: There were differences in screening uptake by SES, marital status, ethnicity, and age but not by gender. Perceived barriers (stand. b = -0.40, p < 0.001), social norms (stand. b = 0.33, p < 0.001), and screening knowledge (stand. b = 0.17, p < 0.001) had independent associations with uptake. SES differences in uptake were mediated through knowledge, social norms, and perceived barriers. Ethnic differences were mediated through knowledge. Differences in uptake by marital status were primarily mediated through social norms and to a lesser extent through knowledge. Age differences were largely unmediated, except for a small mediated effect via social norms. CONCLUSIONS: Sociodemographic differences in CRC screening uptake were largely mediated through social cognitive factors. Impact. Our findings suggest that multifaceted interventions might be needed to reduce socioeconomic inequalities. Ethnic differences might be reduced through improved screening knowledge. Normative interventions could emphasise screening as an activity endorsed by important others outside the immediate family to appeal to a wider audience.

Awareness of lifestyle risk factors for cancer and heart disease among adults in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: To examine and compare awareness of lifestyle risk factors for cancer and heart disease in a single UK representative sample. METHODS: Two open-ended questions about cancer and heart disease risk factors were included in a population-based survey of 1747 adults. Responses were coded for four lifestyles with established links to both diseases: smoking, eating an unhealthy diet, drinking excessive alcohol and physical inactivity. RESULTS: Awareness of lifestyle risk factors was low for both diseases, although higher for heart disease than cancer. The average number identified by respondents was 2.1 (heart disease) and 1.4 (cancer). The strongest predictor was education (both p<0.001). Awareness that physical inactivity is a cancer risk factor was particularly low at 7%. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that public awareness of the impact of lifestyle on commonly feared diseases, especially cancer, is low. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Unhealthy lifestyles make a significant contribution to ill health and mortality. Increased public awareness of the links between lifestyles and commonly feared diseases might help people understand the potential health consequences of their actions and encourage them to make much-needed lifestyle changes. Efforts are needed to improve public health messages about how lifestyle risk factors impact on the chances of developing these important diseases.

Human papillomavirus testing by self-sampling: assessment of accuracy in an unsupervised clinical setting.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the performance and acceptability of unsupervised self-sampling with clinician sampling for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) types for the first time in a UK screening setting. SETTING: Nine hundred and twenty women, from two demographically different centres, attending for routine cervical smear testing. METHODS: Women performed an unsupervised HPV self-test. Immediately afterwards, a doctor or nurse took an HPV test and cervical smear. Women with an abnormality on any test were offered colposcopy. RESULTS: Twenty-one high-grade and 39 low-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasias (CINs) were detected. The sensitivity for high-grade disease (CIN2+) for the self HPV test was 81% (95% confidence interval [CI] 60-92), clinician HPV test 100% (95% CI 85-100), cytology 81% (95% CI 60-92). The sensitivity of both HPV tests to detect high- and low-grade cervical neoplasia was much higher than that of cytology (self-test 77% [95%CI 65-86], clinician test 80% [95% CI 68-88], cytology 48% [95% CI 36-61]). For both high-grade alone, and high and low grades together, the specificity was significantly higher for cytology (greater than 95%) than either HPV test (between 82% and 87%). The self-test proved highly acceptable to women and they reported that the instructions were easy to understand irrespective of educational level. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that it would be reasonable to offer HPV self-testing to women who are reluctant to attend for cervical smears. This approach should now be directly evaluated among women who have been non-attenders in a cervical screening programme.

Sex differences in the association of socioeconomic status with obesity.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated socioeconomic predictors of obesity in men and women. METHODS: Data from the 1996 Health Survey for England were used to compare odds ratios for obesity by education, occupation, and 2 economic markers after control for age, marital status, and ethnicity. RESULTS: Obesity risk was greater among men and women with fewer years of education and poorer economic circumstances and among women, but not men, of lower occupational status. CONCLUSIONS: Higher educational attainment and higher socioeconomic status were associated with a lower risk of obesity in both men and women, whereas higher occupational status was associated with a lower risk only for women. The implications of these findings for understanding causes and prevention of obesity are discussed.