Intrinsic Factors of Non-adherence to Breast and Cervical Cancer Screenings Among Latinas

"Barriers and Advantages of Self-Sampling Tests, for HPV Diagnosis: A Qualitative Field Experience Before Implementation in a Rural Community in Ecuador"

Introduction

Cervical cancer screening has demonstrated high efficacy in reducing cervical cancer mortality worldwide. However, clinician sampling is often perceived as an uncomfortable procedure that could reduce screening uptake. Self-sampling methods for HPV diagnosis have shown high sensitivity, which could increase acceptance and screening rates among women.

Purpose

This study aims to identify the perceived barriers and advantages of self-sampling methods versus clinician sampling for cervical cancer screening in a rural setting in Ecuador.

Patients and Methods

A qualitative study was conducted. Seven focus group discussions took place in the rural Parish of El Valle in Azuay Province, Cuenca, Ecuador. Women native to this rural area were included in the study. FGDs were recorded and transcribed, and content analysis was performed to categorize and analyze the data.

Results

A total of 45 women participated in the study. Clinician sampling was perceived as a painful and intrusive method. However, participants believed that it is more reliable compared to self-sampling methods, attributing this to the direct visualization of the cervix, which facilitates the detection of cervical pathologies. The perceived advantages of self-sampling included increased comfort, pain reduction, time savings, the ability to perform the test at home, and the potential for widespread availability through pharmacies or local traditional healers. Nevertheless, doubts about the test's reliability as well as the user's proficiency in self-testing posed barriers to the adoption of this technique.

Conclusion

Self-sampling methods offer several advantages over clinician sampling, such as enhanced privacy, comfort, and accessibility to cancer screening. Barriers primarily revolved around users' proficiency in performing the test and the reliability of the results. Providing training for using self-sampling tests could address these barriers.

Relationships Among Determinants of Health, Cancer Screening Participation, and Sexual Minority Identity: A Systematic Review

Purpose: To address cancer screening disparities and reduce cancer risk among sexual minority (SM) groups, this review identifies individual, interpersonal, and community/societal determinants of cancer screening (non)participation among differing SM identities. Methods: Seven scientific databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) used quantitative methods; (2) English language; (3) cancer screening focus; and (4) at least one SM group identified. Articles were excluded if: (1) analysis was not disaggregated by SM identity (n = 29) and (2) quantitative analysis excluded determinants of cancer screening (n = 19). The Sexual and Gender Minority Health Disparities Research Framework guided literature synthesis. Results: Twelve studies addressed cervical (n = 4), breast (n = 3), breast/cervical (n = 3), or multiple cancers (n = 2). Other cancers were excluded due to inclusion/exclusion criteria. The total sample was 20,622 (mean 1525), including lesbian (n = 13,409), bisexual (n = 4442), gay (n = 1386), mostly heterosexual (n = 1302), and queer (n = 83) identities. Studies analyzing individual-level determinants (n = 8) found that socioeconomic status affected cervical, but not breast, cancer screening among lesbian and bisexual participants (n = 2). At the interpersonal level (n = 7), provider-patient relationship was a determinant of cervical cancer screening among lesbian participants (n = 4); a relationship not studied for other groups. Studies analyzing community/societal determinants (n = 5) found that rurality potentially affected cervical cancer screening among lesbian, but not bisexual people (n = 3). Conclusions: This review identified socioeconomic status, provider-patient relationship, and rurality as determinants affecting cancer screening among SM people. While literature addresses diverse SM groups, inclusion/exclusion criteria identified studies addressing cisgender women. Addressing disparities in the identified determinants of cervical cancer screening may improve participation among SM women. Further research is needed to understand determinants of cancer screening unique to other SM groups.

Barriers and facilitators to cervical cancer screening among under-screened women in Cuenca, Ecuador: the perspectives of women and health professionals

Background

Cervical cancer screening is a cost-effective method responsible for reducing cervical cancer-related mortality by 70% in countries that have achieved high coverage through nationwide screening strategies. However, there are disparities in access to screening. In Ecuador, although cervical cancer is the second most common cancer in women, only 58.4% of women of reproductive age have ever been screened for cervical cancer.

Methodology

A qualitative study was performed to understand the current barriers to screening and to identify strategies that could increase uptake in Azuay province, Ecuador. Seven focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with under-screened women and health professionals (HPs). The FGDs were recorded and transcribed. Content analysis was done using the socio-ecological framework to categorize and analyse the data.

Results

Overall, 28 women and 27 HPs participated in the study. The two groups perceived different barriers to cervical cancer screening. The HPs considered barriers to be mainly at the policy level (lack of a structured screening plan; lack of health promotion) and the individual level (lack of risk perception; personal beliefs). The women identified barriers mainly at organizational level, such as long waiting times, lack of access to health centres, and inadequate patient–physician communication. Both groups mentioned facilitators at policy level, such as national campaigns promoting cervical cancer screening, and at community and individual level, including health literacy and women’s empowerment.

Conclusions

The women considered access to health services the main barrier to screening, while the HPs identified a lack of investment in screening programmes and cultural patterns at the community level as major obstacles. To take an integrated approach to cervical cancer prevention, the perspectives of both groups should be taken into account. Additionally, new strategies and technologies, such as self-administered human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and community participation, should be implemented to increase access to cervical cancer screening.

Ethnic disparities in cancer incidence and survival among the oldest old in the United States

Objective: To examine potential ethnic disparities in cancer incidence and survival rates among the oldest old using data from the SEER Program.Design: Cases diagnosed with one of the leading four cancer sites (lung and bronchus, colon and rectum, female breast, prostate) and four cancer sites (stomach, liver and intrahepatic bile duct, gallbladder, and cervical) that disproportionally affect Hispanics were reported to one of 18 SEER registries. Differences in cancer incidence were examined for cases aged ≥85 years diagnosed during the most recent 5-year time period (2009-2013) and, to examine changes over time, from 1992 to 2013. Five-year relative cancer survival probability was examined for Hispanics and non-Hispanics aged ≥85 years diagnosed 2006-2012.Results: From 2009 to 2013, non-Hispanics aged ≥85 years had higher incidence rates compared to Hispanics for colon and rectum, lung and bronchus, female breast, and prostate cancers. Five-year survival probability for cancers of all stages combined was higher for non-Hispanics than Hispanics in this age group. However, Hispanics had higher survival probability of colon and rectum and lung and bronchus cancers diagnosed at regional (colon and rectum: 67.2% vs. 60.5%; lung and bronchus: 15.9% vs. 12.7%) and distant (colon and rectum: 5.4% vs. 3.8%; lung and bronchus: 2.8% vs. 2.2%) stages than non-Hispanics, respectively.Conclusion: Ethnic differences in cancer incidence and survival probability exist for the ≥85 population. Continued efforts are needed to understand and reduce ethnic disparities in cancer prevention and treatment for this population.

Healthcare Factors for Obtaining a Mammogram in Latinas With a Variable Mammography History

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To understand the relationship between mammography history and current thoughts about obtaining a mammogram among Latinas and examine the mediation effects of several healthcare factors.
.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.
.

SETTING

Federally qualified health centers (Sea Mar Community Health Centers) in western Washington.
.

SAMPLE

641 Latinas nonadherent and adherent with screening mammography.
.

METHODS

Baseline survey data from Latinas with a mammography history of never, not recent (more than two years), or recent (less than two years) were analyzed. Preacher and Hayes methods were used to estimate the mediation effect of healthcare factors.
.

MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES

The survey assessed mammography history, sociodemographic and healthcare factors, and current thoughts about obtaining a mammogram.
.

FINDINGS

Latinas' thoughts about obtaining a mammogram were associated with mammography history. Having had a clinical breast examination mediated 70% of differences between Latinas with a never and recent mammography history. Receipt of a provider recommendation mediated 54% of differences between Latinas with and without a recent mammography history.
.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings emphasize the importance of the patient-provider relationship during a clinic visit and help inform how nurses may be incorporated into subsequent screening mammography interventions tailored to Latinas.
.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

As providers, health educators, and researchers, nurses have critical roles in encouraging adherence to screening mammography guidelines among Latinas.