14 research outputs found

    EurĂłpai RĂĄkellenes KĂłdex: 12 lehetƑsĂ©g, hogy csökkentse a rĂĄk kialakulĂĄsĂĄnak kockĂĄzatĂĄt

    Get PDF
    Absztrakt A WHO Nemzetközi RĂĄkkutatĂĄsi ÜgynöksĂ©ge a közelmĂșltban adta közre az EurĂłpai RĂĄkellenes KĂłdex negyedik, ĂĄtdolgozott kiadĂĄsĂĄt. Ebben a rosszindulatĂș daganatos betegsĂ©gek elƑfordulĂĄsĂĄnak mĂ©rsĂ©klĂ©sĂ©re szolgĂĄlĂł, szemĂ©lyre szĂłlĂł tanĂĄcsokat 12 pontban foglalja össze. A tanĂĄcsok egy rĂ©sze a daganatkeletkezĂ©sben bizonyĂ­tottan szerephez jutĂł, többsĂ©gĂŒkben a mindennapi Ă©letmĂłddal összefĂŒggƑ kockĂĄzati tĂ©nyezƑk kivĂ©dĂ©sĂ©re szolgĂĄl, mĂĄs rĂ©sze pedig az egĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi ellĂĄtĂłrendszer ĂĄltal nyĂșjtott szolgĂĄltatĂĄsok elfogadĂĄsĂĄra buzdĂ­t. A szerzƑk Ășgy vĂ©lik, a RĂĄkellenes KĂłdex hazĂĄnkban ez ideig nem kapott Ă©rdeme szerinti nyilvĂĄnossĂĄgot az egĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi szolgĂĄltatĂłk körĂ©ben. Minthogy az idƑ elƑtti halĂĄlozĂĄsĂ©rt legnagyobb mĂ©rtĂ©kben okolhatĂł nem fertƑzƑ idĂŒlt betegsĂ©gek nagy hĂĄnyadĂĄnak kialakulĂĄsĂĄban közös kockĂĄzati tĂ©nyezƑk is rĂ©szt vesznek, a kĂłdex tanĂĄcsai egyszerre szolgĂĄljĂĄk a keringĂ©si rendszer betegsĂ©geinek Ă©s a daganatos betegsĂ©gek megelƑzĂ©sĂ©nek ĂŒgyĂ©t. Orv. Hetil., 2016, 157(12), 451–460

    A vastag- Ă©s vĂ©gbĂ©ldaganatok szƱrĂ©sĂ©nek vitatott kĂ©rdĂ©sei: klinikai Ă©s nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi nĂ©zƑpontok ĂŒtközĂ©se = Controversial issues in colorectal screening in Hungary

    Get PDF
    MagyarorszĂĄgon a vastag- Ă©s vĂ©gbĂ©lrĂĄkbĂłl szĂĄrmazĂł halĂĄlozĂĄs drĂĄmaian magas, Ă©s nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi mĂ©retƱ beavatkozĂĄst sĂŒrget, ezĂ©rt a halĂĄlozĂĄs mĂ©rsĂ©klĂ©se a nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi lakossĂĄgszƱrĂ©s rĂ©vĂ©n kiemelt helyet foglal el a Nemzeti NĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi Program cĂ©lkitƱzĂ©sei között. A szerzƑk modelltanulmĂĄnyokban szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlati mĂłdszerkĂ©nt a szĂ©kletbeli rejtett vĂ©r humĂĄn specifikus laboratĂłriumi kimutatĂĄsĂĄt alkalmaztĂĄk, ĂĄtlagosan 32%-os lakossĂĄgi rĂ©szvĂ©tellel. A vastag- Ă©s vĂ©gbĂ©ldaganatok szƱrĂ©sĂ©re vonatkozĂł cĂ©lok azonban nem teljesĂŒltek. Ennek oka – egyĂ©b akadĂĄlyozĂł tĂ©nyezƑk mellett – egy, a szakmĂĄt megosztĂł vitĂĄban keresendƑ, amely a szƱrĂ©s mĂłdszertanĂĄt Ă©s stratĂ©giĂĄjĂĄt Ă©rinti. A közlemĂ©ny kritikusan tĂĄrgyalja a vitatott kĂ©rdĂ©seket azzal a meggyƑzƑdĂ©ssel, hogy a vastag- Ă©s vĂ©gbĂ©lrĂĄk magyarorszĂĄgi epidemiolĂłgiai helyzete a mortalitĂĄs mĂ©rsĂ©klĂ©sĂ©nek ez idƑ szerint legĂ­gĂ©retesebb stratĂ©giĂĄjĂĄnak, a lakossĂĄgi szƱrĂ©snek a folytatĂĄsĂĄt sĂŒrgeti. Orv. Hetil., 2011, 152, 1223–1232. | In Hungary, mortality rates from colorectal cancer are dramatically high, therefore the reduction by population screening as a public health measure is considered as one of the priorities of National Public Health Program. In the beginning, a human-specific immunological test was applied in the „model programs”, as a screening tool, to detect the occult blood in the stool; compliance was 32% in average. However, the objectives of the model programs have not been achieved, because – among other reasons – a debate on method to choice and the strategy to follow have divided the professional public opinion. In this study the debated issues are critically discussed, being convinced that – at present – population screening seems to be the most promising way to alleviate the burden of colorectal cancer. Orv. Hetil., 2011, 152, 1223–1232

    NƑgyĂłgyĂĄszati rĂĄkszƱrĂ©s vagy mĂ©hnyakszƱrĂ©s? : Klinikai Ă©s nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi nĂ©zƑpontok ĂŒtközĂ©se = Gynecological Screening or Cervical Screening? : Conflicts Between Clinical and Public Health Viewpoints

    No full text
    A „nƑgyĂłgyĂĄszati szƱrĂ©s” − a nƑgyĂłgyĂĄszati gyakorlat, majd kĂ©sƑbb a nƑgyĂłgyĂĄszati protokoll szerint is − klinikai nƑgyĂłgyĂĄszati vizsgĂĄlatot jelent, kiegĂ©szĂ­tve kolposzkĂłpos vizsgĂĄlattal, valamint kenetvĂ©tellel sejtvizsgĂĄlat cĂ©ljĂĄra. Ez a gyakorlat az elmĂșlt Ă©vtizedek sorĂĄn rögzĂŒlt a köztudatban. Ezzel szemben bizonyĂ­tĂ©kok csak a sejtvizsgĂĄlaton alapulĂł szƱrĂ©s hatĂĄsossĂĄgĂĄt tĂĄmasztjĂĄk alĂĄ. A „hagyomĂĄnyos” nƑgyĂłgyĂĄszati gyakorlat a bizonyĂ­tottan hatĂĄsos sejtvizsgĂĄlathoz szĂŒksĂ©ges kenetvĂ©telt szakorvosi vizsgĂĄlathoz köti, ezĂĄltal a nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi lakossĂĄgszƱrĂ©st ellehetetlenĂ­ti. A mĂ©hnyakszƱrĂ©s mĂłdszertanĂĄt a hatĂĄlyos nemzetközi nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi gyakorlathoz igazĂ­tandĂł, a szerzƑk „szakdolgozĂłi szƱrĂ©s”-t kezdemĂ©nyeztek, amelyben a mĂ©hnyakszƱrĂ©s csak citolĂłgiai vizsgĂĄlatra korlĂĄtozĂłdik, a kenetet megfelelƑen kĂ©pzett vĂ©dƑnƑk veszik, Ă©s a citolĂłgiai lelet eredmĂ©nyĂ©tƑl fĂŒggƑen a vĂ©dƑnƑ nƑgyĂłgyĂĄszati szakrendelĂ©sre irĂĄnyĂ­tja a rĂĄszorulĂłkat. The ”gynecological screening” that is composed of complex gynecological examination including colposcopy and cytological examinations has traditionally been incorporated into the gynecological protocol and practice. Over the past few decades, unfortunately, this screening practice has entrenched in the mind both of the gynecological community and the general public. As a result, the government-supported, organized cervical screening program of the population has come to a standstill. In order to adjust the cervical screening practice to the international public health recommendations in which cytology is the only screening test applied, the authors decided to involve primary care nurses and health visitors in smear taking, and to refer those with abnormal findings to a gynecologist for further clinical examination

    SzƱrƑvizsgĂĄlatok a tĂŒdƑrĂĄk korai felismerĂ©sĂ©re: a klinikai Ă©s nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi nĂ©zƑpontok ĂŒtközĂ©se = Screening for early detection of lung cancer: Conflict between clinical and public health points of view

    No full text
    MagyarorszĂĄgon a tĂŒdƑrĂĄk a vezetƑ daganatos halĂĄlok, amely a nƑk között mind gyakoribb. A hagyomĂĄnyosan mellkasi röntgenvizsgĂĄlaton Ă©s a köpet citolĂłgiai vizsgĂĄlatĂĄn alapulĂł szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlata a szakma mai ĂĄllĂĄsa szerint nem ajĂĄnlott, mert a szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlat nem csökkenti a tĂŒdƑrĂĄkbĂłl eredƑ halĂĄlozĂĄst. Az alacsony dĂłzisĂș spirĂĄl-komputertomogrĂĄfia (LDCT) Ă­gĂ©retes, mert Ă©rzĂ©kenyen mutatja ki a tĂŒdƑbeli aprĂł gĂłcokat, a mĂłdszer azonban nem fajlagos. A folyamatban lĂ©vƑ randomizĂĄlt, ellenƑrzött tanulmĂĄnyoktĂłl (RTC) Ă©vek mĂșlva vĂĄrhatĂł eredmĂ©ny, addig tömeges vizsgĂĄlatokra nem ajĂĄnlhatĂł. HazĂĄnkban a tĂŒdƑrĂĄkok mintegy harmadĂĄt ernyƑkĂ©p-szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlat alkalmĂĄval fedezik fel, többsĂ©gĂŒket mĂ©g operĂĄlhatĂł ĂĄllapotban, ez azonban a nĂ©pessĂ©gbeli halĂĄlozĂĄst nem befolyĂĄsolja. A szerzƑk ĂĄllĂĄspontja szerint a rosszindulatĂș tĂŒdƑdaganatok felismerĂ©se – kĂŒlönösen a magasan veszĂ©lyeztetett 40 Ă©ven felĂŒli dohĂĄnyzĂł fĂ©rfiak esetĂ©ben – a tuberkulĂłzis lekĂŒzdĂ©sĂ©re lĂ©trehozott ernyƑkĂ©p-szƱrƑrendszer hasznos mellĂ©ktermĂ©ke lehet, nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi szƱrƑtevĂ©kenysĂ©get kezdemĂ©nyezni azonban nem indokolt. Jelenleg a tĂŒdƑrĂĄk-epidĂ©mia megfĂ©kezĂ©sĂ©re hathatĂłs dohĂĄnyzĂĄsellenes intĂ©zkedĂ©sek ajĂĄnlhatĂłk. | In Hungary, lung cancer, gradually increasing among women, is the leading cause of cancer mortality. The screening, using chest x-ray and sputum cytology as screening tool, does not reduce the mortality from lung cancer, therefore, screening for lung cancer is not recommended. The low-dose spiral CT is a sensitive and promising method, however, its specificity is far from being ideal. The results of the on-going RCTs are expected in a few years time, and so far it is not applicable for routine screening. In this country, the one-third of lung cancer cases are detected by the routine chest x-ray for tuberculosis, obligatory by law, and most of the detected cases are still resectable, but this does not have any influence on the mortality. According to our view, the detection of the lung cancer, particularly in those at high risk, is a by-product of periodic chest x-ray aiming at early detection of tuberculosis, however, mass screening for lung cancer as public health measure is not recommended. For the time being, the implementation of tobacco control measures is the only way to reduce the risk of lung cancer in the long run

    A råkellenes méhnyakszƱrés helyzete Európåban | Implementation status of cervical screening in Europe

    No full text
    Az EurĂłpai UniĂł TanĂĄcsĂĄnak ajĂĄnlĂĄsa nyomĂĄn csaknem minden orszĂĄgban szĂŒletett kormĂĄnyzati szĂĄndĂ©knyilatkozat a citolĂłgiai vizsgĂĄlatot alkalmazĂł mĂ©hnyakszƱrĂ©s bevezetĂ©sĂ©rƑl, a vĂ©grehajtĂĄsban azonban jelentƑs kĂŒlönbsĂ©gek vannak. A fejlett orszĂĄgok többsĂ©ge a nemzetközi szakmai szervezetek ĂĄltal ajĂĄnlott szervezett szƱrĂ©si modellt orszĂĄgosan alkalmazza. NĂ©mely orszĂĄgban az alkalomszerƱ szƱrĂ©st vĂ©gzik. A szƱrĂ©si stratĂ©gia (Ă©letkor, szƱrĂ©sek közötti intervallum), valamint a cĂ©llakossĂĄg lefedettsĂ©ge Ă©s a rĂ©szvĂ©tel mutatĂłi orszĂĄgonkĂ©nt vĂĄltozĂłak. SzĂĄmos kesvĂ©sbĂ© fejlett kelet-közĂ©p- Ă©s dĂ©l-eurĂłpai osrszĂĄgban a szƱrƑtevĂ©kenysĂ©g a tervezĂ©s szakaszĂĄban van. MagyarorszĂĄgon az ĂĄtmenet a hagyomĂĄnyos „nƑgyĂłgyĂĄszati rĂĄkszƱrĂ©sbƑl” az ajĂĄnlott szervezett mĂ©hnyakszƱrĂ©sbe folyamatos. A vĂ©dƑnƑk bevonĂĄsĂĄtĂłl tovĂĄbbi javulĂĄs vĂĄrhatĂł. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(50), 1975–1988. | Following the recommendation of the Council of the European Union, almost all governments made a policy statement on the introduction of cytology-based cervical screening for the health care system. However, the status of implementation is uneven. In the majority of the developed countries an organised model of screening recommended by the relevant international professional organisations are in use, while occasional screening is applied in some other countries. Screening strategies (i.e. age range, screening intervals), coverage of the target population, and compliance rates vary significantly. The screening activities are in a planning phase is some less developed Central-Eastern and South European countries. In Hungary, the transition from the traditional “gynaecological cancer screening” into the recommended organised cervical screening is in progress; the active involvement of the district health visitors in the cervical screening would provide further improvement. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(50), 1975–1988

    VastagbĂ©lszƱrĂ©s: a lakossĂĄgi rĂ©szvĂ©telt befolyĂĄsolĂł tĂ©nyezƑk | Factors influencing participation in colorectal screening

    No full text
    A vastagbĂ©lszƱrĂ©sben a lakossĂĄgi rĂ©szvĂ©tel alatta marad a kĂ­vĂĄnatosnak. A rĂ©szvĂ©telt a demogrĂĄfiai Ă©s tĂĄrsadalmi-gazdasĂĄgi tĂ©nyezƑk, valamint a szƱrĂ©st szolgĂĄltatĂł egĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi ellĂĄtĂłrendszer mellett a szƱrĂ©sre meghĂ­vottak szƱrĂ©si magatartĂĄsa befolyĂĄsolja, amelyet lĂ©lektani, kognitĂ­v Ă©s magatartĂĄs-tudomĂĄnyi tĂ©nyezƑk hatĂĄroznak meg. A rĂ©szvĂ©tel cĂ©lszerƱ intervenciĂłs stratĂ©giĂĄval kedvezƑen befolyĂĄsolhatĂł. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(27), 1051–1056. | Participation of the target population in coloretal screening is generally low. In addition to demographic and socio-economic factors, the health care system and- in particular – family doctors play an important role. Further, the rate of participation is influenced by psychological, cognitive and behavioural factors, too. The paper analyses factors related to colorectal screening behaviour and potential interventions designed to screening uptake. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(27), 1051–1056

    Indokolt-e a nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi prosztataszƱrĂ©s? = Is the organised screening of prostate cancer reasonable?

    No full text
    A prosztatarĂĄk MagyarorszĂĄgon is jelentƑs nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi problĂ©ma, ezĂ©rt a halĂĄlozĂĄs mĂ©rsĂ©klĂ©se cĂ©ljĂĄbĂłl szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlata indokolt lenne. SzƱrƑvizsgĂĄlati mĂłdszerek, Ășgymint a prosztataspecifikus antigĂ©n (PSA) kimutatĂĄsa Ă©s a rectalis digitĂĄlis vizsgĂĄlat rendelkezĂ©sre ĂĄllnak, ĂĄm Ă©rzĂ©kenysĂ©gĂŒk, fajlagossĂĄguk, pozitĂ­v jĂłslĂł Ă©rtĂ©kĂŒk kĂ­vĂĄnnivalĂłkat hagy maguk utĂĄn. Nem randomizĂĄlt vizsgĂĄlatokbĂłl szĂĄrmazĂł bizonyĂ­tĂ©kok a szƱrĂ©s lehetsĂ©ges haszna mellett szĂłlnak, azonban randomizĂĄlt, ellenƑrzött vizsgĂĄlatok mĂ©g nem szolgĂĄltattak meggyƑzƑ bizonyĂ­tĂ©kot. A szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlat – a fajlagossĂĄg korlĂĄtozott volta miatt – tĂșldiagnosztizĂĄlĂĄs Ă©s tĂșlkezelĂ©s rĂ©vĂ©n jelentƑs kĂĄrt is okozhat. A szerzƑk nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi szempontbĂłl megalapozott ĂĄllĂĄspontja szerint a szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlati mĂłdszerek alkalomszerƱ felhasznĂĄlĂĄsa a szakorvosi diagnosztika keretĂ©ben nem ĂŒtközik akadĂĄlyba, azonban nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi lakossĂĄgszƱrĂ©s nem kezdhetƑ el mindaddig, amĂ­g a folyamatban lĂ©vƑ randomizĂĄlt, ellenƑrzött vizsgĂĄlatok meg nem hozzĂĄk a vĂĄrt bizonyĂ­tĂ©kokat. | In Hungary, prostate cancer is a major public health problem, therefore screening should be considered to reduce the number of deaths. Screening tests are available, i.e. prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and digital-rectal examination, nevertheless their sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value are far from being perfect. Evidences from non-randomized screening trials suggest possible benefit but randomized controlled trials are still indebted for conclusive evidence. The screening might cause more harm than good due to overdiagnosis and overtreatment as a result of limited specificity of the test. According to authors’ point of view, opportunistic screening as part of diagnostics of patients having symptoms indicative of prostatic disorder is fully justified but mass screening of population of average risk should not be introduced until supportive evidence is available from the ongoing randomized-controlled screening trials

    SzĂĄjĂŒregi szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlatok: tervek az alkalomszerƱ szƱrĂ©s kiterjesztĂ©sĂ©re MagyarorszĂĄgon = Oral cancer screening: how to develop a country-wide opportunistic system in Hungary

    No full text
    MagyarorszĂĄgon a szĂĄjĂŒreg rosszindulatĂș daganatai sĂșlyos nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi problĂ©mĂĄt jelentenek. JĂłllehet korai felismerĂ©sĂŒkre irĂĄnyulĂł szervezett szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlatok hatĂĄsossĂĄgĂĄra epidemiolĂłgiai bizonyĂ­tĂ©kkal nem rendelkezĂŒnk, tekintettel e betegsĂ©g nĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi sĂșlyĂĄra, a Nemzeti NĂ©pegĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi Program lakossĂĄgszƱrĂ©si komponense keretĂ©ben folytatni kell a szĂĄjĂŒregi rĂĄk elƑtti ĂĄllapotok Ă©s korai daganatok felismerĂ©sĂ©re tett erƑfeszĂ­tĂ©seket. Az egĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi kormĂĄnyzat döntĂ©sĂ©t követƑen az Ă©rintett szakmĂĄk kĂ©pviselƑibƑl munkacsoport jött lĂ©tre, amely javaslatokat dolgozott ki egy, az orszĂĄgot lefedƑ, a veszĂ©lyeztetett szemĂ©lyeket rendszeresen vizsgĂĄlĂł alkalomszerƱ szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlati rendszer lĂ©trehozĂĄsĂĄra. A fogorvosok mellett a hĂĄziorvosi Ă©s foglalkozĂĄs-egĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi szolgĂĄlat jelentƑsen hozzĂĄjĂĄrulhat a szĂĄjĂŒregi rĂĄk okozta halĂĄlozĂĄs kĂ­vĂĄnt mĂ©rsĂ©klĂ©sĂ©hez. | In Hungary, the oral cancer represents a very heavy public health problem. Even epidemiological evidence in support of the effectiveness of organized screening for early detection does not exist, the efforts to detect the precancerous lesions and early cancers of oral cavity must be continued. The mass screening component of the National Public Health program provides a good opportunity for that. Following the Government decision, a multidisciplinary Working Group has been brought together, and a proposal made to develop a country-wide opportunistic system to regularly examine those at high risk for oral cancer. In addition to the dentists, the primary care personnel as well as the occupational health service have a lot to offer to the desired effect: reduction of mortality from oral cancer

    A szƱrés nemkívånatos lélektani mellékhatåsai = The undesirable psychological adverse effects of screening

    No full text
    A szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlat elutasĂ­tĂĄsĂĄnak okai között szerepelnek a szƱrĂ©s nemkĂ­vĂĄnatos lĂ©lektani mellĂ©khatĂĄsai. Ennek lehetsĂ©ges okai hĂĄrom csoportba sorolhatĂłk: 1. ÁltalĂĄnos okok, mint pĂ©ldĂĄul az egĂ©szsĂ©gĂŒgyi szolgĂĄltatĂĄsok igĂ©nybevĂ©telĂ©t meghatĂĄrozĂł emberi magatartĂĄs. KĂŒlönösen azoknak a szolgĂĄltatĂĄsoknak az elutasĂ­tĂĄsa gyakori, amelyek nem a jelenben is kĂ­nzĂł tĂŒnetek Ă©s panaszok orvoslĂĄsĂĄt cĂ©lozzĂĄk, hanem a jövƑben majd esetleg fellĂ©pƑ betegsĂ©gek megelƑzĂ©sĂ©t szolgĂĄljĂĄk; ilyen „jövĂŽre irĂĄnyuló” szolgĂĄltatĂĄs a szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlat is. 2. A rĂĄkbetegsĂ©gnek a közfelfogĂĄsban rögzĂŒlt negatĂ­v kĂ©pe Ă©s a gyĂłgyĂ­thatĂłsĂĄgĂĄt illetƑ kĂ©telyek. SzĂłba jönnek tovĂĄbbĂĄ 3. a szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlat szubjektĂ­v megtapasztalĂĄsĂĄval közvetlenĂŒl összefĂŒggƑ okok. A szolgĂĄltatĂłknak törekedniĂŒk kell az okok kikĂŒszöbölĂ©sĂ©re: a) a kĂŒlönbözƑ korĂș, tĂĄrsadalmi helyzetƱ Ă©s mƱveltsĂ©gi szintƱ rĂ©tegekhez szĂłlĂł egĂ©szsĂ©gnevelĂ©s feladata, hogy kialakĂ­tsa a betegsĂ©gmegelƑzĂ©s szĂŒksĂ©gessĂ©gĂ©t elfogadĂł magatartĂĄst, Ă©s vĂĄltoztasson az embereknek a rĂĄkkal szemben eltĂșlzottan negatĂ­v, a veresĂ©get elƑre elkönyvelƑ szemlĂ©letĂ©n; b) a szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlatot szolgĂĄltatĂł szakemberek kötelessĂ©ge, hogy minden tƑlĂŒk telhetƑt megtegyenek a szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlattĂłl visszatartĂł tĂ©nyezƑk mĂ©rsĂ©klĂ©se Ă©rdekĂ©ben. Ennek mĂłdja a jĂł munkaszervezĂ©s Ă©s a szakmai munka minƑsĂ©gĂ©nek optimalizĂĄlĂĄsa, valamint a jĂł kommunikĂĄciĂł: a szƱrƑvizsgĂĄlat elƑtti, alatti Ă©s utĂĄni felvilĂĄgosĂ­tĂĄs, informĂĄciĂłszolgĂĄltatĂĄs Ă©s tanĂĄcsadĂĄs. The psychological adverse effects might play an important role in the non-compliance with the offered screening examination. The possible sources of them are three-fold: 1. The general human attitude, such as the rejection of health interventions, particularly those aiming at the prevention of eventual future health problems instead of handling existing complaints and symptoms at present; the screening can be seen as a „future-oriented” intervention. 2. The cultural image of cancer and the disbelief of its curability. 3. The subjective experiences in relation to the screening process. The providers have to do their best to eliminate these causes: by means of a) health education addressing people of various ages, social classes and cultural levels, promoting the understanding of the importance of disease prevention, and, changing their negative, defetist attitude towards cancer; b) minimizing the psychological adverse effects of all kinds. This can be done by proper organisation of the screening process; optimizing the quality of work, and, provision of good quality of information and advices to the screenees before, during and after the screening
    corecore