Cancer Screening after the Adoption of Paid-Sick-Leave Mandates.

BACKGROUND: By the end of 2022, nearly 20 million workers in the United States have gained paid-sick-leave coverage from mandates that require employers to provide benefits to qualified workers, including paid time off for the use of preventive services. Although the lack of paid-sick-leave coverage may hinder access to preventive care, current evidence is insufficient to draw meaningful conclusions about its relationship to cancer screening. METHODS: We examined the association between paid-sick-leave mandates and screening for breast and colorectal cancers by comparing changes in 12- and 24-month rates of colorectal-cancer screening and mammography between workers residing in metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) that have been affected by paid-sick-leave mandates (exposed MSAs) and workers residing in unexposed MSAs. The comparisons were conducted with the use of administrative medical-claims data for approximately 2 million private-sector employees from 2012 through 2019. RESULTS: Paid-sick-leave mandates were present in 61 MSAs in our sample. Screening rates were similar in the exposed and unexposed MSAs before mandate adoption. In the adjusted analysis, cancer-screening rates were higher among workers residing in exposed MSAs than among those in unexposed MSAs by 1.31 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 2.34) for 12-month colorectal cancer screening, 1.56 percentage points (95% CI, 0.33 to 2.79) for 24-month colorectal cancer screening, 1.22 percentage points (95% CI, -0.20 to 2.64) for 12-month mammography, and 2.07 percentage points (95% CI, 0.15 to 3.99) for 24-month mammography. CONCLUSIONS: In a sample of private-sector workers in the United States, cancer-screening rates were higher among those residing in MSAs exposed to paid-sick-leave mandates than among those residing in unexposed MSAs. Our results suggest that a lack of paid-sick-leave coverage presents a barrier to cancer screening. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute.).

Assessment of barriers to cancer screening and interventions implemented to overcome these barriers in 27 Latin American and Caribbean countries.

There is a gap in the understanding of the barriers to cancer screening participation and complying with downstream management in the Community of Latin American and Caribbean states (CELAC). Our study aimed to assess barriers across the cancer screening pathway from the health system perspective, and interventions in place to improve screening in CELAC. A standardized tool was used to collect information on the barriers across the screening pathway through engagement with the health authorities of 27 member states of CELAC. Barriers were organized in a framework adapted from the Tanahashi conceptual model and consisted of the following dimensions: availability of services, access (covering accessibility and affordability), acceptability, user-provider interaction, and effectiveness of services (which includes governance, protocols and guidelines, information system, and quality assurance). The tool also collected information of interventions in place, categorized in user-directed interventions to increase demand, user-directed interventions to increase access, provider-directed interventions, and policy and system-level interventions. All countries prioritized barriers related to the information systems, such as the population register not being accurate or complete (N = 19; 70.4%). All countries implemented some kind of intervention to improve cancer screening, group education being the most reported (N = 23; 85.2%). Training on screening delivery was the most referred provider-directed intervention (N = 19; 70.4%). The study has identified several barriers to the implementation of cancer screening in the region and interventions in place to overcome some of the barriers. Further analysis is required to evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions in achieving their objectives.

Factors contributing to differences in cervical cancer screening in rural and urban community health centers.

INTRODUCTION: Community health centers (CHCs) provide historically marginalized populations with primary care, including cancer screening. Previous studies have reported that women living in rural areas are less likely to be up to date with cervical cancer screening than women living in urban areas. However, little is known about rural-urban differences in cervical cancer screening in CHCs and the contributing factors, and whether such differences changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Using 8-year pooled Uniform Data System (2014-2021) data and Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition, the extent to which CHC- and catchment area-level characteristics explained rural-urban differences in up-to-date cervical cancer screening was estimated. RESULTS: Up-to-date cervical cancer screening was lower in rural CHCs than urban CHCs (38.2% vs 43.0% during 2014-2019), and this difference increased during the pandemic (43.5% vs 49.0%). The rural-urban difference in cervical cancer screening in 2014-2019 was mostly explained by differences in CHC-level proportions of patients with limited English proficiency (55.9%) or income below the poverty level (12.3%) and females aged 21 to 64 years (9.8%), and catchment area-level's unemployment (3.4%) and primary care physician density (3.2%). However, Medicaid (-48.5%) or no insurance (-19.6%) counterbalanced the differences between rural-urban CHCs. The contribution of these factors to rural-urban differences in cervical cancer screening generally increased in 2020-2021. CONCLUSIONS: Rural-urban differences in cervical cancer screening were mostly explained by multiple CHC-level and catchment area-level characteristics. The findings call for tailored interventions, such as providing resources and language services, to improve cancer screening utilization among uninsured, Medicaid, and patients with limited English proficiency in rural CHCs.

Up-to-Date Colonoscopy Use in Asian and Hispanic Subgroups in New York City, 2003-2016.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer screening uptake in the United States overall has increased, but racial/ethnic disparities persist and data on colonoscopy uptake by racial/ethnic subgroups are lacking. We sought to better characterize these trends and to identify predictors of colonoscopy uptake, particularly among Asian and Hispanic subgroups. STUDY: We used data from the New York City Community Health Survey to generate estimates of up-to-date colonoscopy use in Asian and Hispanic subgroups across 6 time periods spanning 2003-2016. For each subgroup, we calculated the percent change in colonoscopy uptake over the study period and the difference in uptake compared to non-Hispanic Whites in 2015-2016. We also used multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of colonoscopy uptake. RESULTS: All racial and ethnic subgroups with reliable estimates saw a net increase in colonoscopy uptake between 2003 and 2016. In 2015-2016, compared with non-Hispanic Whites, Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, and Central/South Americans had higher colonoscopy uptake, whereas Chinese, Asian Indians, and Mexicans had lower uptake. On multivariable analysis, age, marital status, insurance status, primary care provider, receipt of flu vaccine, frequency of exercise, and smoking status were the most consistent predictors of colonoscopy uptake (≥4 time periods). CONCLUSIONS: We found significant variation in colonoscopy uptake among Asian and Hispanic subgroups. We also identified numerous demographic, socioeconomic, and health-related predictors of colonoscopy uptake. These findings highlight the importance of examining health disparities through the lens of disaggregated racial/ethnic subgroups and have the potential to inform future public health interventions.

Cervical screening among LGBTQ people: how affirming services may aid in achieving cervical cancer elimination targets.

To reach cervical cancer elimination targets it is necessary to increase screening rates among underserved populations such as LGBTQ communities. This paper examines rates of attendance and associated factors of cervical screening in LGBTQ communities. Data from 2,424 people aged 25 to 74 years and assigned female at birth were drawn from an online national Australian survey of LGBTQ adults. Over half of the sample had accessed cervical screening in the past 2 years. Using a multivariable logistic regression analysis, significant associations were found between screening, sociodemographic traits and health-care access. Trans men were least likely to access cervical screening, while bisexual, pansexual and queer identified participants were most likely to access screening. People who lived outside inner-suburban areas and those who had a disability were less likely to have had screening. Evidence of trusting relationships with a general practitioner (having a regular GP and GP's knowledge of the individual's LGBTQ identity) increased the likelihood that participants had screened, as did recent access to a medical service that was LGBTQ-inclusive or catered specifically to LGBTQ communities. The findings suggest the importance of training health providers, as well as targeted public health messaging for increasing uptake of cervical screening among LGBTQ people.

Does Health Literacy Affect Colorectal Cancer Screening Rates?

This study aims to determine the relationship between adult colorectal cancer screening behaviors and health literacy levels. This cross-sectional study aims to determine the relationship between adult colorectal cancer screening behaviors and health literacy levels. Of the participants, only a small proportion had undergone this screening (9.3%). Having an intestinal disease (OR = 23) and having a relative with colorectal cancer (OR = 8) had the highest effect on colorectal screening. There were significant differences between the colorectal screening groups concerning most THLS-32 subgroup scores, including the THLS-32 total score. Health literacy affects colorectal cancer screening rates. Primary care workers, especially community health nurses, are in an ideal position to increase health literacy and thereby increase cancer screening rates.

Flemish population-based cancer screening programs: impact of COVID-19 related shutdown on short-term key performance indicators.

BACKGROUND: Many breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer screening programs were disrupted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to estimate the short-term impact of the temporary shutdown (from March until May- June) of the cancer screening programs invitations in Flanders (Belgium) by looking at invitation coverage, percentage of people screened after invitation and the screening interval. METHODS: Yearly invitation coverage was calculated as the number of people who received an invitation, as a proportion of the people who should have received an invitation that year. Weekly response to the invitation was calculated as the number of people who were screened within 40 days of their date of invitation, as a percentage of the people who received an invitation that week (as a proxy for willingness to screen). Weekly screening interval was calculated as the mean number of months between the current screening and the previous screening of all the people who screened that week. The two last indicators were calculated for each week in 2019 and 2020, after which the difference between that week's value in 2020 and 2019 with 95% confidence intervals. Results of these two indicators were also analysed after stratification for gender, age and participation history. RESULTS: Invitation coverage was not impacted in the colorectal and cervical cancer screening program. In the breast cancer screening program invitation coverage went down from 97.5% (2019) to 88.7% (2020), and the backlog of invitations was largely resolved in the first six months of 2021. The willingness to screen was minimally influenced by COVID-19. The breast cancer screening program had a temporary increase in screening interval in the first months following the restart after COVID-19 related shutdown, when it was on average 2.1 months longer than in 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Willingness to screen was minimally influenced by COVID-19, but there may be an influence on screening coverage because of lower invitation coverage, mainly for the for breast Cancer Screening Program. The increases in screening intervals for the three Cancer Screening Program seem reasonable and would probably not significantly increase the risk of delayed screening cancer diagnoses. When restarting a Cancer Screening Program after a COVID-19 related shutdown, monitoring is crucial.

Uptake of Colorectal Cancer Screening by Physicians Is Associated With Greater Uptake by Their Patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Physicians' own screening practices might affect screening in their patients. We conducted a population-based study to evaluate whether family physicians who underwent colorectal cancer testing were more likely to have patients who underwent colorectal cancer testing. METHODS: We collected demographic and health care information on residents of Ontario, Canada from administrative databases; the sample was restricted to individuals at average risk of colorectal cancer who were 52-74 years old as of April 21, 2016. We obtained a list of all registered physicians in the province; physicians (n = 11,434) were matched with nonphysicians (n = 45,736) on age, sex, and residential location. Uptake of colorectal tests was defined by a record of a fecal occult blood test in the past 2 years, flexible sigmoidoscopy in the past 5 years, or colonoscopy in the past 10 years. Patients were assigned to family physicians based on billing claim frequency, and then the association between colorectal testing in family physicians and their patients was examined using a modified Poisson regression model. RESULTS: Uptake of colorectal tests by physicians and nonphysicians (median age 60 years; 71% men) was 67.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 67.0%-68.7%) and 66.6% (95% CI, 66.2%-67.1%), respectively. Physicians were less likely than nonphysicians to undergo fecal occult blood testing and were more likely to undergo colonoscopy; prevalence ratios were 0.44 (95% CI, 0.42-0.47) and 1.24 (95% CI, 1.22-1.26), respectively. Uptake of colorectal tests by family physicians was associated with greater uptake by their patients (adjusted prevalence ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.08-1.12). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one-third of physicians and nonphysicians are overdue for colorectal cancer screening. Patients are more likely to be tested if their family physician has been tested. There is an opportunity for physicians to increase their participation in colorectal cancer screening, which could, in turn, motivate their patients to undergo screening.

Impact of COVID-19 on Cervical Cancer Screening Rates Among Women Aged 21-65 Years in a Large Integrated Health Care System - Southern California, January 1-September 30, 2019, and January 1-September 30, 2020.

On March 19, 2020, the governor of California issued a statewide stay-at-home order to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).* The order reduced accessibility to and patient attendance at outpatient medical visits,† including preventive services such as cervical cancer screening. In-person clinic visits increased when California reopened essential businesses on June 12, 2020.§ Electronic medical records of approximately 1.5 million women served by Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC), a large integrated health care system, were examined to assess cervical cancer screening rates before, during, and after the stay-at-home order. KPSC policy is to screen women aged 21-29 years every 3 years with cervical cytology alone (Papanicolaou [Pap] test); those aged 30-65 years were screened every 5 years with human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and cytology (cotesting) through July 15, 2020, and after July 15, 2020, with HPV testing alone, consistent with the latest recommendations from U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.¶ Compared with the 2019 baseline, cervical cancer screening rates decreased substantially during the stay-at-home order. Among women aged 21-29 years, cervical cytology screening rates per 100 person-months declined 78%. Among women aged 30-65 years, HPV test screening rates per 100 person-months decreased 82%. After the stay-at-home order was lifted, screening rates returned to near baseline, which might have been aided by aspects of KPSC's integrated, organized screening program (e.g., reminder systems and tracking persons lost to follow-up). As the pandemic continues, groups at higher risk for developing cervical cancers and precancers should be evaluated first. Ensuring that women receive preventive services, including cancer screening and appropriate follow-up in a safe and timely manner, remains important.

Predictors of cancer screening among Black and White Maryland Medicaid enrollees with serious mental illness.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is the second leading cause of death for people with serious mental illness (SMI), such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. People with SMI receive cancer screenings at lower rates than the general population. AIMS: We sought to identify factors associated with cancer screening in a publicly insured population with SMI and stratified by race, a factor itself linked with differential rates of cancer screening. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used Maryland Medicaid administrative claims data (2010-2018) to examine screening rates for cervical cancer (N = 40,622), breast cancer (N = 9818), colorectal cancer (N = 19,306), and prostate cancer (N = 4887) among eligible Black and white enrollees with SMI. We examined individual-level socio-demographic and clinical factors, including co-occurring substance use disorder, medical comorbidities, psychiatric diagnosis, obstetric-gynecologic and primary care utilization, as well as county-level characteristics, including metropolitan status, mean household income, and primary care workforce capacity. Generalized estimating equations with a logit link were used to examine the characteristics associated with cancer screening. RESULTS: Compared with white enrollees, Black enrollees were more likely to receive screening for cervical cancer (AOR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.15-1.22), breast cancer (AOR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.19-1.36), and colorectal cancer (AOR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.02-1.13), while similar rates were observed for prostate cancer screening (AOR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.96-1.18). Primary care utilization and longer Medicaid enrollment were positively associated with cancer screening while co-occurring substance use disorder was negatively associated with cancer screening. CONCLUSION: Improving cancer screening rates among populations with SMI should focus on facilitating continuous insurance coverage and access to primary care.

The impact of demographics, socioeconomics, and health care access on melanoma outcomes.

Disparities in melanoma care exist in the United States. Disparities in provider type, patient demographics, place of residence, insurance status, socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, and age impact melanoma outcomes. Melanomas detected by dermatologists are thinner, at an earlier stage, and have better survival outcomes compared with detection by primary care providers or patients. Lower socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, and place of residence are associated with decreased access to or use of dermatologists, or both, and more advanced melanomas at diagnosis. Additionally, uninsured and publicly insured individuals are more likely to present with late-stage melanomas, resulting in worse outcomes. This review provides a comprehensive overview of how structural and patient-level characteristics influence melanoma outcomes in order to inform clinical care and health care policy as it relates to addressing gaps in melanoma care.

Lessons Learned in Managing Patients with Colorectal Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OPINION STATEMENT: The COVID-19 pandemic forced us to rapidly and dramatically shift our medical priorities and decision making. With little literature or experience to rely on, the initial priority was to minimize patient exposure to the hospital and to others. It remains unclear whether cancer patients are at higher risk of infection or serious complications, or if it is our traditional therapies that place them to be at higher risk. By far, the greatest negative impact was on screening. Routine colonoscopies were considered elective, and as a result, delays in diagnosis will be felt for years to come. The most positive changes were the incorporation of tele-visits, increased use of oral therapies, alterations in treatment schedules of both chemotherapy and radiation, and an increased emphasis on neoadjuvant therapy. These too will be felt for years to come. The colorectal cancer medical community has responded collaboratively and effectively to maintain treatment and to optimize outcomes for our patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Addressing Disparities in Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility and Healthcare Access. An Official American Thoracic Society Statement.

Background: There are well-documented disparities in lung cancer outcomes across populations. Lung cancer screening (LCS) has the potential to reduce lung cancer mortality, but for this benefit to be realized by all high-risk groups, there must be careful attention to ensuring equitable access to this lifesaving preventive health measure.Objectives: To outline current knowledge on disparities in eligibility criteria for, access to, and implementation of LCS, and to develop an official American Thoracic Society statement to propose strategies to optimize current screening guidelines and resource allocation for equitable LCS implementation and dissemination.Methods: A multidisciplinary panel with expertise in LCS, implementation science, primary care, pulmonology, health behavior, smoking cessation, epidemiology, and disparities research was convened. Participants reviewed available literature on historical disparities in cancer screening and emerging evidence of disparities in LCS.Results: Existing LCS guidelines do not consider racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and sex-based differences in smoking behaviors or lung cancer risk. Multiple barriers, including access to screening and cost, further contribute to the inequities in implementation and dissemination of LCS.Conclusions: This statement identifies the impact of LCS eligibility criteria on vulnerable populations who are at increased risk of lung cancer but do not meet eligibility criteria for screening, as well as multiple barriers that contribute to disparities in LCS implementation. Strategies to improve the selection and dissemination of LCS in vulnerable groups are described.

Screening for Lung Cancer - 10 States, 2017.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States; 148,869 lung cancer-associated deaths occurred in 2016 (1). Mortality might be reduced by identifying lung cancer at an early stage when treatment can be more effective (2). In 2013, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended annual screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography (CT) for adults aged 55-80 years who have a 30 pack-year* smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years (2).† This was a Grade B recommendation, which required health insurance plans to cover lung cancer screening as a preventive service.§ To assess the prevalence of lung cancer screening by state, CDC used Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data¶ collected in 2017 by 10 states.** Overall, 12.7% adults aged 55-80 years met the USPSTF criteria for lung cancer screening. Among those meeting USPSTF criteria, 12.5% reported they had received a CT scan to check for lung cancer in the last 12 months. Efforts to educate health care providers and provide decision support tools might increase recommended lung cancer screening.

Introduction of HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in Central America: The Scale-Up project.

The Scale-Up project introduced vaginal self-sampling and low-cost human papillomavirus (HPV) testing as the primary approach for cervical cancer screening in selected public health centers in Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua. We evaluate the country-specific accomplishments in screening: target-coverage, triage, and treatment. Between 2015 and 2018, cervical cancer screening was offered to women at least 30 years of age. Triage of HPV-positive women was based on visual inspection with acetic acid or Pap. Aggregated data included total women screened, use of self-sampling, age, time elapsed since last screening, HPV results, triage tests, triage results, and treatment. A total of 231,741 women were screened for HPV, representing 85.8% of the target populations within the project. HPV positivity was lower in Guatemala (12.4%) compared to Honduras and Nicaragua (14.5% and 14.2%, respectively, p < 0.05). A follow-up triage test was completed for 84.2%, 85.8%, and 50.1% of HPV-positive women in Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Honduras, respectively. Of those with a positive triage test, 84.7%, 67.1%, and 58.8% were treated in Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Honduras, respectively. First-time screening was highest in Nicaragua (55.8%) where self-sampling was also widely used (97.1%). The Scale-Up project demonstrated that large-scale cervical cancer screening and treatment intervention in a high-burden, low-resource setting can be achieved. Self-sampling and ablative treatment were key to the project's achievements. Data monitoring, loss to follow-up, and triage methods of screen- positive women remain critical to full success.

Interventions to improve early detection of childhood cancer in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Childhood cancer outcomes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) lag behind those in high-income countries (HICs), in part due to late presentation and diagnosis. Though several interventions targeting early detection of childhood cancer have been implemented in LMICs, little is known about their efficacy. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to identify studies describing such interventions. We searched multiple databases from inception to December 4, 2019. Studies were included if they reported on LMIC interventions focused on: (a) training of health care providers on early recognition of childhood cancer, or (ii) public awareness campaigns. We used preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to conduct our review. The risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) checklist was used to assess quality of studies. RESULTS: Twelve studies met inclusion criteria (n = 5 full text, n = 7 abstract only). Five studies focused on retinoblastoma only, while the others focused on all types of childhood cancer. The majority studied multiple interventions of which early detection was one component, but reported overall outcomes. All identified studies used pre-post evaluative designs to measure efficacy. Five studies reported statistically significant results postintervention: decrease in extraocular spread of retinoblastoma, decrease in rates of refusal/abandonment of treatment, increase in number of new referrals, increase in knowledge, and an absolute increase in median 5-year survival. Other studies reported improvements without tests of statistical significance. Two studies reported no difference in survival postintervention. The ROBINS-I checklist indicated that all studies were at serious risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Though current evidence suggests that LMIC interventions targeting early detection of childhood cancer through health professional training and/or public awareness campaigns may be effective, this evidence is limited and of poor quality. Robust trials or quasi-experimental designs with long-term follow up are needed to identify the most effective interventions. Such studies will facilitate and inform the widespread uptake of early detection interventions across LMIC settings.

Distribution and predictors associated with the use of breast cancer screening services among women in 14 low-resource countries.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is one of the leading public health problem globally, especially in low-resource countries (LRCs). Breast cancer screening (BCS) services are an effective strategy for early determining of breast cancer. Hence, it is imperative to understand the utilisation of BCS services and their correlated predictors in LRCs. This study aims to determine the distribution of predictors that significantly influence the utilisation of BCS services among women in LRCs. METHODS: The present study used data on 140,974 women aged 40 years or over from 14 LRCs. The data came from country Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) between 2008 and 2016. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was employed to investigate the significant predictors that influence the use of BCS services. RESULTS: The utilisation of BCS services was 15.41%, varying from 81.10% (95% CI: 76.85-84.73%) in one European country, to 18.61% (95% CI: 18.16 to 19.06%) in Asian countries, 14.30% (95% CI: 13.67-14.96%) in American countries, and 14.29% (95% CI: 13.87-14.74%). Factors that were significantly associated to increase the use of BCS services include a higher level of education (OR = 2.48), advanced age at first birth (> 25 years) (OR = 1.65), female-headed households (OR = 1.65), access to mass media communication (OR = 1.84), health insurance coverage (OR = 1.09), urban residence (OR = 1.20) and highest socio-economic status (OR = 2.01). However, obese women shown a significantly 11% (OR = 0.89) lower use of BSC services compared to health weight women. CONCLUSION: The utilisation of BCS services is low in many LRCs. The findings of this study will assist policymakers in identifying the factors that influence the use of BCS services. To increase the national BCS rate, more attention should be essential to under-represented clusters; in particular women who have a poor socioeconomic clusters, live in a rural community, have limited access to mass media communication, and are have a low level educational background. These factors highlight the necessity for a new country-specific emphasis of promotional campaigns, health education, and policy targeting these underrepresented groups in LRCs.

Effects of different reminder strategies on first-time mammography screening among women in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND: The study's purpose was to examine the effectiveness of different reminder strategies on first-time free mammography screening among middle-aged women in Taiwan. METHODS: A quasi-experimental design with random assignment was adopted to divide the participants into three Reminder Strategies groups (mail reminder, telephone reminder, and combined mail and telephone reminders) and one control group. This study recruited 240 eligible middle-aged women, and 205 of them completed the study. Upon the completion of data collection, mail reminders were provided to women of the first group; telephone reminders were provided to the second group; mail followed by telephone reminders were provided to the third group, and the usual postcards were provided to the control group 1 month after the interventions. Two follow-up assessments were conducted 1 and 3 months after the intervention to collect mammography-screening behaviors from all groups. RESULTS: The findings showed that, compared to the control group, more participants in the intervention groups underwent mammography screening after receiving reminder interventions. Telephone contact as reminder was found to have the most significant influence among the interventions (OR = 5.0556; 95% CI = 2.0422-13.5722). CONCLUSIONS: Government and healthcare providers are recommended to consider adopting the telephone reminder strategy to encourage women to undergo their first-time mammography screening.

Incitation à participer à une campagne de dépistage du cancer du col de l'utérus : expérience d'un centre de soins tertiaires au Canada.

OBJECTIVES: The main objective of this study was to determine the most cost-effective communications strategy for National Cervical Cancer Awareness Week. The secondary objectives were to identify the reasons women were not screened by their primary care provider and to determine the number of abnormal cytology results obtained as a result of the awareness week screening. METHODOLOGY: As part of an evaluation of the quality of care, we reviewed the medical records of all patients who underwent cervical cancer screening at a Québec teaching hospital during National Cervical Cancer Awareness Week. RESULTS: A total of 202 women underwent screening during the national awareness week, held in October 2018. For 180 of the women, we were able to identify the communications strategies that led them to get screened and to obtain information on their follow-up care with their primary health care provider. No-cost marketing channels (including Facebook, the hospital website, and a news report and interview) led to 66 women (36.7%) participating, making these channels the most cost-effective. While 59% of the women had a family physician, 41% of them reported that their family physician did not perform pelvic exams. Abnormal cytology results were reported for 2.8% of the women. CONCLUSION: No-cost communications channels were the most effective for raising awareness. The majority of participants had a family physician. Efforts to raise awareness of cervical cancer must continue in order to increase screening rates. In addition, strategies must be put in place to improve access to Pap tests.

Examining Breast Cancer Screening Behavior Among Southern Black Women After the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force Mammography Guideline Revisions.

Updated United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) and American Cancer Society mammography screening recommendations push for increased age of initiation and lengthened breast cancer screening intervals. These changes have implications for the reduction of breast cancer mortality in Black women. The purpose of this study was to examine breast cancer screening behavior in a cohort of Southern Black women after the release of the 2009 USPSTF recommendations. Surveys assessing cancer screening information were collected from members of Black churches between 2006 and 2013. The sample was restricted to women aged 40 to 74 years, who did not report a breast cancer diagnosis, or a recent diagnostic mammogram (n = 789). Percentages of women ever completing a mammogram (age 40-49) and annual mammography (age 50-74) in 2006-2009 and 2010-2013 were compared using chi-square statistics. Logistic regression models were fit to determine the predictors of adherence to pre-2010 screening guidelines. No significant changes in mammography rates were found for women in the 40-49 age group (X2 = 0.42, p = 0.52) nor for those in the 50-74 age group (X2 = 0.67, p = 0.41). Completing an annual clinical breast exam was a significant predictor of adherence to pre-2010 screening guidelines for both age groups (OR 19.86 and OR 33.27 respectively) and participation in education sessions (OR 4.26). Stability in mammography behavior may be a result of PCP's advice, or community activities grounded pre-2010 screening recommendations. More research is needed to understand how clinical interactions and community-based efforts shape Black women's screening knowledge and practices.