Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The Public's Intended Uptake of Hypothetical Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Screening Scenarios: A Nationwide Survey.
Sijben, Jasmijn; Rainey, Linda; Maas, Fleur; Broeders, Mireille J M; Siersema, Peter D; Peters, Yonne.
  • Sijben J; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  • Rainey L; Department for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  • Maas F; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  • Broeders MJM; Department for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  • Siersema PD; Dutch Expert Centre for Screening, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  • Peters Y; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 2024 May 10.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38619114
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Screening for early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) may potentially reduce EAC-related mortality and morbidity. This study aimed to examine the Dutch population's intended uptake of 3 hypothetical EAC screening test scenarios and preferences for potential future organization.

METHODS:

A total of 8,350 Dutch individuals aged 45-75 years were invited, of whom 2,258 completed a web-based survey. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 hypothetical screening test scenarios (i.e., transnasal endoscopy, ingestible cell collection device, or breath analysis). The primary outcome was intended uptake. Secondary outcomes included acceptance of screening eligibility criteria and preferences regarding invitation, counseling, and diagnostic follow-up. We performed exploratory univariable and multivariable regression analyses to assess which determinants were associated with EAC screening intent.

RESULTS:

Intended uptake of screening was highest in the breath analysis scenario (95%), followed by conventional upper endoscopy (78%), an ingestible cell collection device (75%), and transnasal endoscopy (68%) ( P < 0.001). Anticipating discomfort was most strongly associated with decreased intention to undergo transnasal endoscopy (odds ratio 0.18, 95% confidence interval 0.11-0.29) or swallow a cell collection device (odds ratio 0.20, 95% confidence interval 0.13-0.32). Cancer worry and high acceptance of test sensitivity/specificity were consistently associated with a positive intention to participate in screening. Inviting persons for screening based on gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms, age, or the output of a risk prediction model was acceptable to 74%, 69%, and 66%, respectively. Inviting only men was acceptable for only 41% of women. The majority (58%) preferred to be invited by a public health organization, and 32% of the participants preferred to discuss their decision to participate with a healthcare professional.

DISCUSSION:

Participants in this study self-selected through a web-based survey, potentially introducing selection bias. Participants generally intended to participate in EAC screening, although the level of intent depended on the discomfort and performance associated with the offered screening test. Determining eligibility based on gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms, age, or a risk calculator, but not sex, would be acceptable to most individuals.

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article