Women's experiences with opting out of cervical cancer screening and the role of the nurse in the women's decision-making process.

AIM: To explore Danish women's experiences with opting out of cervical cancer screening and the role of the nurse in the women's decision-making process. DESIGN: A qualitative study using semi-structured, individual interviews with a phenomenological-hermeneutic approach. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 13 women with experience in opting out of cervical cancer screening. Women were recruited through a public flyer and interviewed virtually or by phone. The interviews were analysed using the theory of interpretation from Paul Ricoeur and consisted of three levels: naïve reading, structural analysis, and critical discussion and analysis. The present study adheres to the COREQ guidelines. RESULTS: The women experience various personal causes for opting out of cervical cancer screening, such as low accessibility of screening appointments, discomfort during the smear test, fear of being sick, and insufficient information about the relevance of screening to the individual woman. The perceived disadvantages of screening outweighed their perceived advantages. The women's experiences did not include the role of the nurse in the procedures and knowledge sharing related to cervical cancer screening. However, nurses were described as having good communicative and relational qualifications relevant to being involved in cervical cancer screening. CONCLUSION: It was challenging for the women to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of cervical cancer screening and thus to make an informed decision about participation. They expressed a need for more information on which to base their decision. This places nurses in a much needed, yet unexplored, role of identifying and lowering potential personal barriers that may outweigh the women's perceived benefits of participating in screening. IMPLICATION FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Nurses should play a more active role in cervical cancer screening such as improving general knowledge and facilitating two-way communication about its relevance. REPORTING METHOD: The present study adheres to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) guidelines. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

A retrospective study of needs and interventions among patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 in Denmark referred to rehabilitation in the period 2000-2019.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) is a progressive multisystem disorder that requires a special focus on the delivery of health and rehabilitation. The aim of the study was to identify the needs and interventions in patients with DM1 referred to a national rehabilitation hospital and to illustrate the needs and interventions in relation to predefined subgroups of disease classification. METHOD: Electronic medical records from the period 2000-2019 of a randomized sample of patients with DM1 (N = 193) were reviewed to identify rehabilitation needs and interventions. The sample was classified into four subgroups of disease classifications. The number of identified needs and interventions were presented as medians and range, and differences between subgroups were illustrated by Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance. The needs were categorized using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). RESULTS: A total of 2099 needs and 2103 interventions were registered. The most frequent needs were coordination of healthcare services (480) and employment and income (363), while the most frequent interventions were counselling (835) and follow-up (386). Patients with congenital DM1 had the most needs and interventions per person. In relation to the ICF, the most registered needs were environmental factors (880) and activity and participation (848). CONCLUSION: All subgroups of patients with DM1 had a substantial number of needs and interventions related to coordinating and navigating within the healthcare system. The subgroup of patients with congenital DM1 had the most needs and interventions compared to the other subgroups.