Applying the health belief model to explore healthcare provider and patient perspectives on homologous recombination deficiency testing in cancer: A narrative review

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) testing can inform cancer treatment decisions, particularly regarding the use of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. However, uptake of HRD testing is inconsistent across healthcare settings. This review aimed to explore healthcare provider and patient perspectives on the use of HRD testing in cancer care. METHODS: A narrative review was conducted to identify studies reporting on individual views, perceptions, and experiences with HRD testing. Literature searches were performed in Embase, Medline, CINAHL, and PsycINFO for English-language articles published between 2000 and 2026. Eligible studies used quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods approaches. Findings were analyzed using the Health Belief Model to identify perceived benefits, barriers, and factors influencing test uptake. RESULTS: Sixteen studies were included, covering both healthcare provider and patient perspectives. The most commonly reported facilitator was the perceived benefit of HRD testing in informing treatment decisions, particularly for guiding PARP inhibitor use. Patients emphasized the importance of provider recommendations in their decision to undergo testing. Reported barriers included lack of healthcare provider knowledge, limited access to testing, inconsistent clinical guidelines, financial concerns, and low patient awareness. CONCLUSIONS: While both patients and healthcare providers recognize the value of HRD testing in cancer care, uptake is limited by informational and structural barriers. Efforts to improve access and implementation should include the development of standardized guidelines, provider and patient education, and policy strategies to ensure equitable access. Further research is needed to assess more patient perspectives and the real-world impact of HRD testing on care delivery and outcomes.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.