title: Investigating the role of the general practitioner in cancer prevention: a mixed methods study.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Despite evidence of the effectiveness of cancer preventive services and the increasing development of guidelines, actual rates of delivery of cancer prevention activities remain low. Due to their frequent front-line contact with the public, family physicians (GPs) have the potential to play an important role in the primary prevention of cancer. However, there is a lack of information about their actual role in cancer prevention. The aim of this study was to investigate the actual and potential roles of general practitioners (GP) in the prevention of cancer.
  
  
  METHODS
  A sequential exploratory mixed methods approach was used. The sample included all the General Practice (GP) practices in a region in the UK (n=345). Postal questionnaires were administered to GPs (n=1249); following 290 returns (response rate 23%), semi-structured interviews were undertaken with GPs (n=14).
  
  
  RESULTS
  The majority of the GP respondents (66.4%, n=184) considered that they routinely provided cancer prevention information. This was specifically focusing on smoking cessation as almost all GPs (96.8%, n=270) enquired about a patient's smoking status. Overall, 47.2% (n=128) of GP respondents indicated that they felt they did not have time to perform a cancer prevention role; however, 88.3% (n=242) still felt that they had the 'opportunity' to do so. Over half the sample (61.3%, n=168) indicated that imposed health priorities and targets militated against providing cancer prevention activities. Almost all the GP respondents (98.9%, n=273) agreed with empowering individuals to take responsibility for their health issues. The GPs identified the need for alternative models for cancer prevention beyond current face to face patient care, including other health and non-health professionals. Whilst lack of time was identified as a critical factor, the GPs indicated that significant efforts were made to encourage patients to take personal responsibility for lifestyle choices.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The GPs indicated a need for training around behavioural change and theories of motivation and action. This has implications for primary care and family physicians worldwide. While doctor-patient consultations and the physicians' credibility offer great potential for cancer prevention, time pressures and imposed government targets often mean that their actual cancer prevention role is reduced.
authors: Institute of Nursing and Health Research, University of Ulster, Newtownabbey, N. Ireland, UK. sj.mcilfatrick@ulster.ac.uk
authors: Sonja
authors: S
authors: McIlfatrick
authors: Sinead
authors: S
authors: Keeney
authors: Hugh
authors: H
authors: McKenna
authors: Nigel
authors: N
authors: McCarley
authors: Gerry
authors: G
authors: McElwee
mesh_terms: D006801:Humans; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000517:prevention & control*; D010821:Physicians, Family / Q000592:standards*; D024382:Professional Role; D036301:Qualitative Research
references: Br J Cancer. 2009 Dec 3;101 Suppl 2:S18-23
references: 19956158
references: Lancet. 1999 Apr 3;353(9159):1127-31
references: 10209975
references: Public Health. 2005 Nov;119(11):1023-30
references: 16084544
references: Tob Control. 2001 Mar;10(1):27-32
references: 11226357
references: BMJ. 2003 Aug 30;327(7413):498-500
references: 12946974
references: CMAJ. 2012 Feb 7;184(2):E135-43
references: 22143227
references: Addiction. 2005 Oct;100(10):1423-31
references: 16185204
references: Br J Gen Pract. 2000 Mar;50(452):180-1
references: 10750224
references: Am J Public Health. 2003 Apr;93(4):635-41
references: 12660210
references: BMJ. 2000 Feb 5;320(7231):354-7
references: 10657333
references: Eur J Cancer. 2009 Apr;45(6):931-91
references: 19171476
references: Am J Gastroenterol. 2007 Aug;102(8):1727-35
references: 17437502
references: Br J Gen Pract. 1999 Mar;49(440):187-90
references: 10343420
references: Prev Med. 2005 May;40(5):595-601
references: 15749144
references: Pharm Res. 2008 Sep;25(9):2097-116
references: 18626751
references: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Apr 18;(2):CD001271
references: 15846614
references: Lancet. 2005 Nov 19;366(9499):1784-93
references: 16298215
references: Med Care. 2005 Sep;43(9):939-44
references: 16116360
references: J Gen Intern Med. 2008 Jun;23(6):821-3
references: 18350338
references: Lancet Oncol. 2007 Sep;8(9):773-83
references: 17714991
references: N Engl J Med. 1996 Apr 11;334(15):996-8
references: 8596615