Detecting Peripheral Arterial Disease in Primary Care: A Population Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) can progress silently without any clinical symptoms. Ankle-brachial index (ABI) is the recommended method used in primary care. We aimed to determine the prevalence of PAD and its related risk factors in primary care. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 250 participants aged ≥45 years were recruited randomly from the registered patients of family health center in a district of Izmir, Turkey. Patients' demographic data, PAD symptoms, and PAD risk factors were obtained. The PAD group consisted of patients with ABI levels <0.9; the non-compressible artery (NCA) group consisted of patients with ABI levels >1.3. RESULTS: The prevalence of PAD was 17.6% (22.5% in women and 11.1% in men), while that of NCA was 15.2% (12.7% in women and 25.0% in men). About 27.3% and 54.5% of patients with PAD did not have claudication and problems with walking distance, respectively. Of the NCA patients, 15.8% had problems with walking distance and 39.5% had claudication. Regression analysis revealed two predictors of PAD (age ≥65 years: odds ratio [OR], 3.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.65-7.47; claudication: OR, 3.41; 95% CI, 1.58-7.39) and three predictors of NCA (age <65 years: OR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.01-6.45; male sex: OR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.10-5.25; triglyceride [TG] >200 mg/dL: OR, 4.11; 95% CI, 1.58-10.67). CONCLUSION: PAD had a prevalence of 17.6% and was associated with age ≥65 years and claudication. NCA had a prevalence of 15.2% and was associated with age <65 years, TG >200 mg/dL, and male sex.

To understand or not to understand: This is the problem.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The aim of the study was to evaluate the level of readability of the informed consent used before colonoscopy in a university hospital by different methods, and to investigate related sociodemographic variables. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This descriptive, cross-sectional study included 211 subjects aged over 18. Three different measurement tools were used to evaluate the level of readability of the informed consent: The Cloze Readability Procedure, the Flesch's readability formula adapted to Turkish by Atesman, and the readability formula developed by Cetinkaya and Uzun. RESULTS: The readability scores of the text, calculated according to Atesman's formula, the Cetinkaya-Uzun, and Cloze Readability Procedure were 50.183 (the average level of difficulty), 31.021 (frustration level), and 26.68 (frustration level), respectively. The informed consent was found to be appropriate for individuals educated at the grade level 10 and above. The following participants were found to have significantly higher scores: educated above high school; reading books, magazines, digital media, and printed media every day or every other day; and previously informed about colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: Within the framework of a colon cancer screening program conducted by the Public Health Institution of Turkey, individuals who tested positive were subjected to the colonoscopy procedure, if necessary. This increases the importance of the informed consent form used prior to the colonoscopy procedure. The patients and/or patients'relatives who are at the frustration level of reading ability would have problems in reading and comprehending the text. The Cloze Test Procedure might be used in examining problematic consent forms.

The Importance of Family History in Breast Cancer Patients in Primary Care Setting: a Cross-sectional Study.

Screening recommendations of physicians are important for women to raise awareness about their risk factors and to promote appropriate screening behaviors. However, it seems challenging for primary care physicians (PCPs) to balance disease prevention and diagnosis, treatment. The objective of this study was to describe physicians' breast cancer consultancy practice including family history, cancer prevention issues for the women they care. This cross-sectional study included 577 women aged above 45 years, free of breast cancer, during their visits to their PCPs. Nearly half of the women reported their visit to PCPs for an annual examination during the year. Among them, 36.1% had first-degree relatives with cancer and 7.3% with breast cancer. But they reported to be asked about family history of cancer and informed about cancer prevention issues 35.1 and 26.4%, respectively. Cancer still seems to be a hard issue to be discussed, even with women visiting PCPs for annual examination. Asking first-degree relative with breast cancer can give PCPs the chance of determining women with increased risk and support women's appropriate understanding of their own risk in relation to their family history. This routine can make shared-decision making for developing person-centered approach for breast cancer screening possible. Further studies are needed for better understanding of loss of consultancy leadership of physicians for breast cancer.

Breast cancer risk perceptions of Turkish women attending primary care: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: As the risks and benefits of early detection and primary prevention strategies for breast cancer are beginning to be quantified, the risk perception of women has become increasingly important as may affect their screening behaviors. This study evaluated the women's breast cancer risk perception and their accuracy, and determined the factors that can affect their risk perception accuracy. METHODS: Data was collected in a cross-sectional survey design. Questionnaire, including breast cancer risk factors, risk perceptions and screening behaviors, answered by 624 women visiting primary health care center (PHCC). "Perceived risk" investigated with numeric and verbal measures. Accuracy of risk perception was determined by women's Gail 5-year risk scores. RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 59.62 ± 1.97 years. Of the women 6.7% had a first-degree relative with breast cancer, 68.9% performed breast self-examination and 62.3% had a mammography, and 82.9% expressed their breast cancer worry as "low". The numeric measure correlated better with worry and Gail scores. Of the women 65.5% perceived their breast cancer risk accurately. Among the women in "high risk" group 65.7% underestimated, while in "average risk" group 25.4% overestimated their risk. CONCLUSIONS: Turkish women visiting PHCC are overtly and overly optimistic. This was especially obvious with the result that nearly one third had had no mammography. There is a need for further studies to understand why and how this optimism is maintained so that better screening strategies can be applied at PHCC. All health workers working at PHCC have to be aware of this optimism to prevent missed opportunities for cancer screening.