Identifying Sociocultural Barriers to Mammography Adherence Among Appalachian Kentucky Women

Development of a Novel Protocol for Germline Testing in Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Guidelines now recommend universal germline genetic testing (GGT) for all pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients. Testing provides information on actionable pathogenic variants and guides management of patients and family. Since traditional genetic counseling (GC) models are time-intensive and GC resources are sparse, new approaches are needed to comply with guidelines without overwhelming available resources.

METHODS

A novel protocol was developed for physician-led GGT. Completed test kits were delivered to the GC team, who maintained a prospective database and mailed all orders. If results revealed pathogenic variants for PDAC, patients were offered comprehensive GC, whereas negative and variant of uncertain significance (VUS) test results were reported to patients via brief calls.

RESULTS

During protocol implementation between January 2020 and December 2022, 310 (81.5%) patients underwent GGT, with a physician compliance rate of 82.6% and patient compliance rate of 98.7%. Of 310 patients tested, 44 (14.2%) patients had detection of pathogenic variants, while 83 (26.8%) patients had VUS. Pathogenic variants included BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 (n = 18, 5.8%), ATM (n = 9, 2.9%), CFTR (n = 4, 1.3%), EPCAM/MLH1/MSH2/MSH6/PMS2 (n = 3, 1.0%), and CDKN2A (n = 2, 0.7%). The GC team successfully contacted all patients with pathogenic variants to discuss results and offer comprehensive GC.

CONCLUSION

Our novel protocol facilitated GGT with excellent compliance despite limited GC resources. This framework for GGT allocates GC resources to those patients who would benefit most from GC. As we continue to expand the program, we seek to implement methods to ensure compliance with cascade testing of high-risk family members.

Factors affecting women's participation in mammography screening in Nordic countries: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Mammography screening programs have been implemented in European countries as prevention tools aimed at reducing breast cancer mortality through early detection in asymptomatic women. Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, the Faroe Islands, and Greenland) demonstrated high participation rates; however, breast cancer mortality could be limited by further optimizing screening. This review aimed to explore factors that affect women's participation in mammography screening in Nordic countries.

METHOD

A systematic review of segregated mixed research synthesis using a deductive approach was conducted. The following databases and platforms were searched to identify relevant studies: CINAHL with Full Text (EBSCOHost), MEDLINE (EBSCOHost), PsycInfo (ProQuest), Scopus (Elsevier) and Web of Science Core Collection (SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, A&HCI, CPCI-S, CPCI-SSH, and ESCI). The Critical Appraisal Skills Program was used for quality assessment. The Health Promotion Model was applied to integrate findings from qualitative and qualitative research. All methodological steps followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

The final selection (16 articles) included studies from three Nordic countries: Denmark (four quantitative studies), Norway (one qualitative and four quantitative studies), and Sweden (three qualitative and seven quantitative studies). Sixty-three factors were identified as barriers, facilitators, or factors with no influence.

CONCLUSION

A substantial number of obtained factors, spread across a wide spectrum, describe (non-)participation in mammography screening as a versatile phenomenon.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The findings of this review could benefit the mammography staff and providers regarding possible interventions aimed at improving screening participation rates.

Breast cancer screening adherence rates and barriers of implementation in ethnic, cultural and religious minorities: A systematic review

Breast cancer is the most common cancer affecting women worldwide. Adherence to breast cancer screening guidelines is frequently lower in racial, ethnic and cultural minority populations and is affected by potential inequities or barriers to screening that these minorities face. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to collect information from different minority groups worldwide, assess adherence to breast cancer screening and evaluate barriers or limitations causing non-adherence, which should facilitate the development of effective interventions. A search was conducted through PubMed and Web of Science. Studies were considered as eligible if they met the following criteria: i) Female patients; ii) breast cancer screening program implemented in the country; iii) minority groups; iv) asymptomatic; v) report written in Portuguese or English; vi) study published from 2015 onwards. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist was used for qualitative studies and the Strengthening The Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist for cross-sectional studies. From the 348 initial articles, 86 were removed due to duplication and 19 were selected, analyzed and summarized, accordingly. Of the 19 studies included, 5.3% were classified as high quality, 52.6% as moderate to high and 42.1% as moderate. A total of 15 studies were cross-sectional and 4 were qualitative, collectively including 250,733 women. The rate of adherence to mammogram in different minorities was evaluated, obtaining a mean value of 49.7% in the last 2 years, and statistically significant barriers were selected and divided into sociodemographic; personal; ethnic, cultural and religious; and external factors. The characteristics of each population play a major role in the population's breast health practices. If the population, adherence rates, barriers and inequities are carefully studied, screening models may be customized and participation to breast cancer screening can be optimized, thereby reducing the high breast cancer-associated mortality.

Medicaid Expansion and Breast Cancer Screening in Appalachia and Non-Appalachia, United States, BRFSS 2003 to 2015

Background:

Prior data suggests that breast cancer screening rates are lower among women in the Appalachian region of the United States. This study examined the changes in breast cancer screening before and after the implementation of the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion, in Appalachia and non-Appalachia states.

Methods:

Data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System between 2003 and 2015 were analyzed to evaluate changes in breast cancer screening in the past 2 years among US women aged 50-74 years. Multivariable adjusted logistic regression and generalized estimating equation models were utilized, adjusting for sociodemographic, socioeconomic, and health-care characteristics. Data were analyzed for 2 periods: 2003 to 2009 (pre-expansion) and 2011 to 2015 (post-expansion) comparing Appalachia and non-Appalachia states.

Results:

The prevalence for of self-reported breast cancer screening in Appalachia and non-Appalachia states were 83% and 82% (P < .001), respectively. In Appalachian states, breast cancer screening was marginally higher in non-expanded versus expanded states in both the pre-expansion (relative risk [RR]: 1.002, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.002-1.003) and post-expansion period (RR: 1.001, 95% CI: 1.001-1.002). In non-Appalachian states, screening was lower in non-expanded states versus expanded states in both the pre-expansion (RR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.97-0.98) and post-expansion period (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.95-0.96). There were modest 3% to 4% declines in breast cancer screening rates in the pos-texpansion period regardless of expansion and Appalachia status.

Conclusions:

Breast cancer screening rates were higher in Appalachia versus non-Appalachia US states and higher in expanded versus nonexpanded non-Appalachia states. There were modest declines in breast cancer screening rates in the post-expansion period regardless of expansion and Appalachia status, suggesting that more work may be needed to reduce administrative, logistical, and structural barriers to breast cancer screening services.

Barriers and facilitators to mammography among women with intellectual disabilities: a qualitative approach

Although women with intellectual disabilities have the same breast cancer incidence rate as women without intellectual disabilities, they have fewer mammograms and higher mortality rates. Qualitative inquiry was employed to explore barriers and facilitators to mammography among this population. In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 30 women with intellectual disabilities and their caregivers in Philadelphia during 2015-2016. Thematic analysis was conducted using inductive and deductive coding. While results provide further evidence for prior research on barriers to mammography among women with intellectual disabilities (e.g. being unprepared, fear of the exam), this study generated novel barriers such as lack of breast ultrasound awareness, sedation failing to work, and lack of mammogram education in adult day programs, and novel facilitators such as extended family support and positive attitudes. Results support the need to address barriers and promote facilitators to improve the breast cancer screening experience among women with intellectual disabilities.

Lay Epistemology of Breast Cancer Screening Guidelines Among Appalachian Women

Recent changes to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines for breast cancer screening have contributed to increased patient uncertainty regarding the timing and appropriateness of screening behaviors. To gain insight into the lay epistemology of women regarding breast cancer screening practices, we conducted in-depth, face-to-face interviews with 24 adult women living in a medically underserved Appalachian region. We found that women were unaware of breast cancer screening guidelines (i.e., start age, frequency, stop age). Qualitative analysis revealed two lay epistemological narratives establishing (a) uncertain knowledge and ambiguity about breast cancer screening guidelines but certain knowledge of other women's experiences with breast cancer diagnoses, and (b) feelings of knowing one's own body best and seeing the value in "overscreening" to save even one life. Our findings have theoretical and practical implications for scholars and practitioners seeking to improve knowledge or behavior regarding adherence to breast cancer screening recommendations.