Geographic access to mammography screening centre and participation of women in the Quebec Breast Cancer Screening Programme

Differential Access to Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Compared with Mammography and Ultrasound

INTRODUCTION

For high-risk women, breast magnetic resonance (MR) is the preferred supplemental imaging option, but spatial access differences may exacerbate disparities in breast care.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study examining distance between ZIP codes and the nearest breast imaging facility (MR, mammography, ultrasound) using 2023 data from the Food and Drug Administration and the American College of Radiology. Linear regression was used to assess distance differences controlling for Area Deprivation Index (ADI), urbanicity, and population size. Analyses were conducted in 2024.

RESULTS

Among the 29,629 ZIP codes with an ADI and known urbanicity, unadjusted mean distance to breast MR was 23.2±25.1 miles (SD) compared with 8.2±8.3 for mammography and 22.2±25.0 for ultrasound. Hence, the average distance to breast MR facilities was 2.8 times further than to mammography facilities. ADI and urbanicity were associated with increased distance to the nearest breast imaging facility. The additional miles associated with the least advantaged areas compared with most advantaged areas was 12.2 (95%CI: 11.3, 13.2) for MR, 11.5 miles (95%CI: 10.6, 12.3) for ultrasound, and 2.4 (95%CI: 2.1, 2.7) for mammography. Compared with metropolitan areas, the additional miles to breast MR facilities was 23.2 (95%CI: 22.5, 24.0) for small/rural areas.

CONCLUSIONS

Spatial access is substantially better for mammography sites compared with breast MR or ultrasound sites. Given these findings, consideration of options to mitigate the impact of differential access should be considered. For example, mammography sites could offer contrast-enhanced mammography. Future research should examine the feasibility and effectiveness of this and other options.

Current and Future Perspectives on Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer: A Roadmap From 2023 to 2027 From the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer

Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer substantially reduces mortality from lung cancer, as revealed in randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses. This review is based on the ninth CT screening symposium of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, which focuses on the major themes pertinent to the successful global implementation of LDCT screening and develops a strategy to further the implementation of lung cancer screening globally. These recommendations provide a 5-year roadmap to advance the implementation of LDCT screening globally, including the following: (1) establish universal screening program quality indicators; (2) establish evidence-based criteria to identify individuals who have never smoked but are at high-risk of developing lung cancer; (3) develop recommendations for incidentally detected lung nodule tracking and management protocols to complement programmatic lung cancer screening; (4) Integrate artificial intelligence and biomarkers to increase the prediction of malignancy in suspicious CT screen-detected lesions; and (5) standardize high-quality performance artificial intelligence protocols that lead to substantial reductions in costs, resource utilization and radiologist reporting time; (6) personalize CT screening intervals on the basis of an individual's lung cancer risk; (7) develop evidence to support clinical management and cost-effectiveness of other identified abnormalities on a lung cancer screening CT; (8) develop publicly accessible, easy-to-use geospatial tools to plan and monitor equitable access to screening services; and (9) establish a global shared education resource for lung cancer screening CT to ensure high-quality reading and reporting.

Addressing Inequity in Spatial Access to Lung Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

The successful implementation of an equitable lung cancer screening program requires consideration of factors that influence accessibility to screening services.

METHODS

Using lung cancer cases in British Columbia (BC), Canada, as a proxy for a screen-eligible population, spatial access to 36 screening sites was examined using geospatial mapping and vehicle travel time from residential postal code at diagnosis to the nearest site. The impact of urbanization and Statistics Canada's Canadian Index of Multiple Deprivation were examined.

RESULTS

Median travel time to the nearest screening site was 11.7 min (interquartile range 6.2-23.2 min). Urbanization was significantly associated with shorter drive time (p < 0.001). Ninety-nine percent of patients with ≥60 min drive times lived in rural areas. Drive times were associated with sex, ethnocultural composition, situational vulnerability, economic dependency, and residential instability. For example, the percentage of cases with drive times ≥60 min among the least deprived situational vulnerability group was 4.7% versus 44.4% in the most deprived group.

CONCLUSIONS

Populations at risk in rural and remote regions may face more challenges accessing screening services due to increased travel times. Drive times increased with increasing sociodemographic and economic deprivations highlighting groups that may require support to ensure equitable access to lung cancer screening.

Role of mammography accessibility, deprivation and spatial effect in breast cancer screening participation in France: an observational ecological study

BACKGROUND

The detection of cancer in its early latent stages can improve patients' chances of recovery and thereby reduce the overall burden of the disease. Our objectives were to investigate factors (geographic accessibility and deprivation level) affecting mammography screening participation variation and to determine how much geographic variation in participation rates can be explained by spillover effects between adjacent areas, while controlling for covariates.

METHODS

Mammography screening participation rates between 2015 and 2016 were calculated by census blocks (CB), for women aged 50-74 years, residing in Lyon metropolitan area. Global spatial autocorrelation tests were applied to identify the geographic variation of participation. Spatial regression models were used to incorporate spatial structure to estimate associations between mammography participation rate and the combined effect (geographic accessibility and deprivation level) adjusting for modes of travel and social cohesion.

RESULTS

The mammography participation rate was found to have a statistically significant and positive spatial correlation. The participation rate of one CB was significantly and positively associated with the participation rates of neighbouring CB. The participation was 53.2% in residential and rural areas and 46.6% in urban areas, p < 0.001. Using Spatial Lag models, whereas the population living in most deprived CBs have statistically significantly lower mammography participation rates than lower deprived ones, significant interaction demonstrates that the relation differs according to the degree of urbanization.

CONCLUSIONS

This study makes an important methodological contribution in measuring geographical access and understanding better the combined effect of deprivation and the degree of urbanization on mammography participation and other contextual factors that affect the decision of using mammography screening services -which is a critical component of healthcare planning and equity.

Factors influencing participation in breast cancer screening in an urban setting. A study of organized and individual opportunistic screening among potentially active and retired women in the city of Nice

Participation in breast cancer screening in urban settings is poor. Identifying factors accounting for participation and non-participation is essential to target priority areas, tackle health inequalities and suggest innovative approaches. We studied organized and individual opportunistic participation in breast cancer screening within the 144 aggregated units for statistical information (Ilôts regroupés pour l'information statistique: IRIS) of the city of Nice from 2019 to 2021. In each IRIS was assessed a local human development index, among potentially active women aged 50 to 59 years and retired women aged 60 to 74 years. Modelling participation and non-participation in screening according to the IRIS units' socio-economical characteristics was performed using the SURE method (Seemingly Unrelated Regression Equations). Over a 2-year period, 24,396 breast screening tests were conducted (11,173 as organised screening, 13,223 as individual opportunistic screening). The local human development index was positively correlated with the two types of screening, respectively. Access to public transport facilitated participation. Managerial status was negatively correlated with organised screening. Single working women had a higher risk of non-participation. With regard to their socio-economic characteristics, screening rates were lower than expected in 16 IRIS units in the city of Nice. Local human development index, access to public transport, family and professional context appear to be associated with breast cancer screening in an urban setting. An innovative approach targeting these factors is called for to reduce health inequalities.

Influence of geographic access and socioeconomic characteristics on breast cancer outcomes: A systematic review

Socio-economic and geographical inequalities in breast cancer mortality have been widely described in European countries and the United States. To investigate the combined effects of geographic access and socio-economic characteristics on breast cancer outcomes, a systematic review was conducted exploring the relationships between: (i) geographic access to healthcare facilities (oncology services, mammography screening), defined as travel time and/or travel distance; (ii) breast cancer-related outcomes (mammography screening, stage of cancer at diagnosis, type of treatment and rate of mortality); (iii) socioeconomic status (SES) at individuals and residential context levels. In total, n = 25 studies (29 relationships tested) were included in our systematic review. The four main results are: The statistical significance of the relationship between geographic access and breast cancer-related outcomes is heterogeneous: 15 were identified as significant and 14 as non-significant. Women with better geographic access to healthcare facilities had a statistically significant fewer mastectomy (n = 4/6) than women with poorer geographic access. The relationship with the stage of the cancer is more balanced (n = 8/17) and the relationship with cancer screening rate is not observed (n = 1/4). The type of measures of geographic access (distance, time or geographical capacity) does not seem to have any influence on the results. For example, studies which compared two different measures (travel distance and travel time) of geographic access obtained similar results. The relationship between SES characteristics and breast cancer-related outcomes is significant for several variables: at individual level, age and health insurance status; at contextual level, poverty rate and deprivation index. Of the 25 papers included in the review, the large majority (n = 24) tested the independent effect of geographic access. Only one study explored the combined effect of geographic access to breast cancer facilities and SES characteristics by developing stratified models.

Determinants of Non-Participation in Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Breast cancer (BC) screening can be performed in a screening program (BCSP) or in opportunistic screening. The existing reviews on the determinants of non-participation depend on self-reported data which may be biased. Furthermore, no distinction was made between the probably different determinants of both screening strategies.

Objective

To find the determinants of non-participation in BCSP by means of a meta-analysis.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for observational studies which quantified factors associated with non-participation in BCSP in a general population. Studies on opportunistic screening and studies using self-reported data were excluded. A random-effect model was used to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Potential sources of heterogeneity were explored by stratification of the results.

Results

Twenty-nine studies with in a total of 20,361,756 women were included. Low income (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.10–1.30), low education (OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.05–1.32), living far from an assigned screening unit (OR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.07–1.24), being immigrant (OR: 2.64, 95% CI: 2.48–2.82), and having a male family doctor (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.20–1.61) was associated with higher non-participation in screening. Reminders sent to non-attenders and estimations of ORs (adjusted or not) partly explained substantial heterogeneity.

Conclusion

In this meta-analysis excluding studies on the non-participation in opportunistic screening, or with self-reported data on non-participation, the well-known determinants for non-participation are still significant, but less strong. This analysis only supports the relevance of meta-analysis of studies with registered non-participation in a BCSP.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO, CRD42020154016.

Factors associated with attendance at screening for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Attendance at population-based breast cancer (mammographic) screening varies. This comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis assesses all identified patient-level factors associated with routine population breast screening attendance.

DESIGN

CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, OVID, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched for studies of any design, published January 1987-June 2019, and reporting attendance in relation to at least one patient-level factor.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Independent reviewers performed screening, data extraction and quality appraisal. OR and 95% CIs were calculated for attendance for each factor and random-effects meta-analysis was undertaken where possible.

RESULTS

Of 19 776 studies, 335 were assessed at full text and 66 studies (n=22 150 922) were included. Risk of bias was generally low. In meta-analysis, increased attendance was associated with higher socioeconomic status (SES) (n=11 studies; OR 1.45, 95% CI: 1.20 to 1.75); higher income (n=5 studies; OR 1.96, 95% CI: 1.68 to 2.29); home ownership (n=3 studies; OR 2.16, 95% CI: 2.08 to 2.23); being non-immigrant (n=7 studies; OR 2.23, 95% CI: 2.00 to 2.48); being married/cohabiting (n=7 studies; OR 1.86, 95% CI: 1.58 to 2.19) and medium (vs low) level of education (n=6 studies; OR 1.24, 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.41). Women with previous false-positive results were less likely to reattend (n=6 studies; OR 0.77, 95% CI: 0.68 to 0.88). There were no differences by age group or by rural versus urban residence.

CONCLUSIONS

Attendance was lower in women with lower SES, those who were immigrants, non-homeowners and those with previous false-positive results. Variations in service delivery, screening programmes and study populations may influence findings. Our findings are of univariable associations. Underlying causes of lower uptake such as practical, physical, psychological or financial barriers should be investigated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016051597.

Exploring the influence of rural residence on uptake of organized cancer screening - A systematic review of international literature

Lower screening uptake could impact cancer survival in rural areas. This systematic review sought studies comparing rural/urban uptake of colorectal, cervical and breast cancer screening in high income countries. Relevant studies (n = 50) were identified systematically by searching Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL. Narrative synthesis found that screening uptake for all three cancers was generally lower in rural areas. In meta-analysis, colorectal cancer screening uptake (OR 0.66, 95 % CI = 0.50-0.87, I² = 85 %) was significantly lower for rural dwellers than their urban counterparts. The meta-analysis found no relationship between uptake of breast cancer screening and rural versus urban residency (OR 0.93, 95 % CI = 0.80-1.09, I² = 86 %). However, it is important to note the limitation of the significant statistical heterogeneity found which demonstrates the lack of consistency between the few studies eligible for inclusion in the meta-analyses. Cancer screening uptake is apparently lower for rural dwellers which may contribute to poorer survival. National screening programmes should consider geography in planning.

Beyond Universal Health Care: Barriers to Breast Cancer Screening Participation in Canada

PURPOSE

Despite well-established preventive screening guidelines for breast cancer, screening rates do not meet targets in both the United States and Canada. Although access to preventive care is an important factor toward participation, breast cancer screening rates in Canada vary despite a universal health care system. The objective of this study is to understand features within the Canadian population that potentiate screening disparities through a systematic review of the literature.

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE and Embase was performed to identify relevant studies published from 2005 onward. Titles and abstracts were screened, followed by full-text screening. Inclusion criteria were defined as studies reporting on disparities in image-based screening for breast cancer.

RESULTS

Three hundred twenty-four studies were retrieved, from which 29 studies were selected on the basis of the predetermined inclusion criteria. Population groups identified at risk for low image-based screening participation included those of low socioeconomic status, individuals with comorbidities, new immigrants and refugees, those in remote geographic locations, individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities, and ethnocultural minorities. Barriers to image-based screening can be improved by targeting measures specific to these at-risk groups at the individual, organization, and policy levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple at-risk population groups exist for preventive cancer screening within a universal health care system. By understanding specific characteristics within these vulnerable populations, effective intervention strategies can be established to improve breast cancer preventive care.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Mobile Mammography Unit for Breast Cancer Screening to Reduce Geographic and Social Health Inequalities

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the leading cancer in terms of incidence and mortality among women in France. Effective organized screening does exist, however, the participation rate is low, and negatively associated with a low socioeconomic status and remoteness.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the cost-effectiveness of a mobile mammography (MM) program to increase participation in breast cancer screening and reduce geographic and social inequalities.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis from retrospective data was conducted from the payer perspective, comparing an invitation to a mobile mammography unit (MMU) or to a radiologist's office (MM or RO group) with an invitation to a radiologist's office only (RO group) (n = 37 461). Medical and nonmedical direct costs were estimated. Outcome was screening participation. The mean incremental cost and effect, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve were estimated.

RESULTS

The mean incremental cost for invitation to MM or RO was estimated to be €23.21 (95% CI, 22.64-23.78) compared with RO only, and with a point of participation gain of 3.8% (95% CI, 2.8-4.8), resulting in an incremental cost per additional screen of €610.69 (95% CI, 492.11-821.01). The gain of participation was more important in women living in deprived areas and for distances exceeding 15 km from an RO.

CONCLUSION

Screening involving a MMU can increase participation in breast cancer screening and reduce geographic and social inequalities while being more cost-effective in remote areas and in deprived areas. Because of the retrospective design, further research is needed to provide more evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using a MMU for organized breast cancer screening and to determine the optimal conditions for implementing it.

Mapping Variation in Breast Cancer Screening: Where to Intervene?

Small geographic areas with lower mammography screening participation rates may reflect gaps in screening efforts. Our objective was to use spatial analyses to understand disparities in mammography screening use and to identify factors to increase its uptake in areas that need it in Lyon metropolitan area, France. Data for screened women between the ages of 50 and 74 were analyzed. Census blocks of screened and non screened women were extracted from the mammography screening programme 2015-2016 dataset. We used spatial regression models, within a generalized additive framework to determine clusters of census blocks with significantly higher prevalence of non-participation of mammography screening. Smoothed risk maps were crude and adjusted on the following covariates: deprivation index and opportunistic screening. Among 178,002 women aged 50 to 74, 49.9% received mammography screening. As hypothesized, women living in highly deprived census blocks had lower participation rates compared to less deprived blocks, 45.2% vs. 51.4% p < 0.001. Spatial analyses identified four clusters, one located in an urban area and three in suburban areas. Moreover, depending on the location of the cluster, the influence came from different variables. Knowing the impact of site-specific risk factors seems to be important for implementing an appropriate prevention intervention.

Associations of County-level Radiologist and Mammography Facility Supply with Screening Mammography Rates in the United States

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The present study aims to assess associations of Medicare beneficiary screening mammography rates with local mammography facility and radiologist availability.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Mammography screening rates for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries were obtained for US counties using the County Health Rankings data set. County-level certified mammography facility counts were obtained from the United States Food and Drug Administration. County-level mammogram-interpreting radiologist and breast imaging subspecialist counts were determined using Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services fee-for-service claims files. Spearman correlations and multivariable linear regressions were performed using counties' facility and radiologist counts, as well as counts normalized to counties' Medicare fee-for-service beneficiary volume and land area.

RESULTS

Across 3035 included counties, average screening mammography rates were 60.5% ± 8.2% (range 26%-88%). Correlations between county-level screening rates and total mammography facilities, facilities per 100,000 square mile county area, total mammography-interpreting radiologists, and mammography-interpreting radiologists per 100,000 county-level Medicare beneficiaries were all weak (r = 0.22-0.26). Correlations between county-level screening rates and mammography rates per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries, total breast imaging subspecialist radiologists, and breast imaging subspecialist radiologists per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries were all minimal (r = 0.06-0.16). Multivariable analyses overall demonstrated radiologist supply to have a stronger independent effect than facility supply, although effect sizes remained weak for both.

CONCLUSION

Mammography facility and radiologist supply-side factors are only weakly associated with county-level Medicare beneficiary screening mammography rates, and as such, screening mammography may differ from many other health-care services. Although efforts to enhance facility and radiologist supply may be helpful, initiatives to improve screening mammography rates should focus more on demand-side factors, such as patient education and primary care physician education and access.

Availability and accessibility of subsidized mammogram screening program in peninsular Malaysia: A preliminary study using travel impedance approach

Access to healthcare is essential in the pursuit of universal health coverage. Components of access are availability, accessibility (spatial and non-spatial), affordability and acceptability. Measuring spatial accessibility is common approach to evaluating access to health care. This study aimed to determine the availability and spatial accessibility of subsidised mammogram screening in Peninsular Malaysia. Availability was determined from the number and distribution of facilities. Spatial accessibility was determined using the travel impedance approach to represent the revealed access as opposed to potential access measured by other spatial measurement methods. The driving distance of return trips from the respondent's residence to the facilities was determined using a mapping application. The travel expenditure was estimated by multiplying the total travel distance by a standardised travel allowance rate, plus parking fees. Respondents in this study were 344 breast cancer patients who received treatment at 4 referral hospitals between 2015 and 2016. In terms of availability, there were at least 6 major entities which provided subsidised mammogram programs. Facilities with mammogram involved with these programs were located more densely in the central and west coast region of the Peninsula. The ratio of mammogram facility to the target population of women aged 40-74 years ranged between 1: 10,000 and 1:80,000. In terms of accessibility, of the 3.6% of the respondents had undergone mammogram screening, their mean travel distance was 53.4 km (SD = 34.5, range 8-112 km) and the mean travel expenditure was RM 38.97 (SD = 24.00, range RM7.60-78.40). Among those who did not go for mammogram screening, the estimated travel distance and expenditure had a skewed distribution with median travel distance of 22.0 km (IQR 12.0, 42.0, range 2.0-340.0) and the median travel cost of RM 17.40 (IQR 10.40, 30.00, range 3.40-240.00). Higher travel impedance was noted among those who lived in sub-urban and rural areas. In summary, availability of mammogram facilities was good in the central and west coast of the peninsula. The overall provider-to-population ratio was lower than recommended. Based on the travel impedance approach used, accessibility to subsidised mammogram screening among the respondents was good in urban areas but deprived in other areas. This study was a preliminary study with limitations. Nonetheless, the evidence suggests that actions have to be taken to improve the accessibility to opportunistic mammogram screening in Malaysia in pursuit of universal health coverage.

Influence of Distance to Hospital and Insurance Status on the Rates of Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy, a National Cancer Data Base study

INTRODUCTION

We evaluated the impact of travel distance and insurance status on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rates in breast cancer.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) for women >18 years of age with a nonmetastatic primary breast cancer of ductal, lobular, or mixed histology. Patient- and facility-specific CPM rates were calculated based on insurance, race, and distance to treatment center. Standard univariable and multivariable regression analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Overall, the CPM rate was 6.5% for the 864,105 patients identified. Most patients traveled <20 miles to a treatment center (79.5%) and had private insurance or Medicare (58.3 and 33.4%, respectively). In general, younger, White, non-Hispanic, and privately insured patients residing further from a treatment center was associated with increased rates of CPM. However, distance to the treatment center and insurance type had a greater absolute impact on rates of CPM for Black and Hispanic patients. Absolute CPM rate increases for patients >100 miles from a treatment center compared with those <20 miles from a treatment center were observed to be greater for Black and Hispanic patients (3.5 and 3.9%, respectively) compared with White and non-Hispanic patients (2.5 and 2.6%). Additionally, further patient travel distance was associated with higher treatment center-specific CPM rates.

CONCLUSION

Increased travel distance is independently associated with increased rates of CPM for all patients and increased facility-specific rates of CPM. Black and Hispanic patients were found to be more vulnerable to the impact of travel distance and insurance status on rates of CPM.

Distance to screening site and older adults' participation in cognitive impairment screening

AIM

To develop intervention strategies that promote screening for cognitive impairment, it is essential to identify the modifiable predictors for participation in screening. The present study aimed to examine whether a shorter distance to the screening site predicted participation in screening for cognitive impairment, and whether interactive effects of the distance and psychological factors on the participation would be observed among community-dwelling older adults.

METHODS

The study used a prospective design. After a baseline questionnaire survey, participation in screening for cognitive impairment was followed for 6 months (n = 9616). The distance to the screening site was measured by road distance from each residential address and categorized into four groups (<1 km, 1-1.99 km, 2-2.99 km, ≥3 km). The questionnaire measured psychological factors (behavioral intention and perceived benefits of screening), driving status and demographic factors.

RESULTS

A logistic regression analysis showed that compared with the <1 km group, the 2-2.99 km (adjusted odds ratio 0.62, P = 0.040) and ≥3 km (adjusted odds ratio 0.54, P = 0.015) groups did not participate in screening after adjusting for psychological and demographic factors, and driving status. The interaction of the distances and psychological factors on participation were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The distance to the screening site predicted participation in cognitive impairment screening among older adults regardless of their psychological status. This finding shows that improving access to screening sites would be effective for promoting screening for cognitive impairments among both low and highly motivated older adults. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2018; 18: 146-153.

Does lack of resources impair access to breast and cervical cancer screening in Japan?

Objectives

To assess the impact of the quantity of resources for breast and cervical cancer screening on the participation rates in screening in clinical settings in municipalities, as well as to clarify whether lack of resources impairs access to cancer screening in Japan.

Methods

Of the 1,746 municipalities in 2010, 1,443 (82.6%) and 1,469 (84.1%) were included in the analyses for breast and cervical cancer screening, respectively. In order to estimate the effects of the number of mammography units and of gynecologists on the participation rates in breast and cervical cancer screening in clinical settings, multiple regression analyses were performed using the interaction term for urban municipalities.

Results

The average participation rate in screening in clinical settings was 6.01% for breast cancer, and was 8.93% for cervical cancer. The marginal effect of the number of mammography units per 1,000 women was significantly positive in urban municipalities (8.20 percent point). The marginal effect of the number of gynecologists per 1,000 women was significantly positive in all municipalities (2.54 percent point) and rural municipalities (3.68 percent point).

Conclusions

Lack of mammography units in urban areas and of gynecologists particularly in rural areas impaired access to breast and cervical cancer screening. Strategies are required that quickly improve access for the residents and increase their participation rates in cancer screening.

Proximity of health care center and cervical cancer screening uptake in Thailand

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer is one of the most common cancers among women worldwide, and in Thailand is the second most common cancer among women. In 2008, a national cervical cancer screening programme was implemented in Thailand, but coverage remains relatively low.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the study was to investigate whether cervical cancer screening uptake is associated with the area of residency in Thailand.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A case-control study was carried out in women aged 30 to 60 year-old, who live in Sikhiu district, Nakhon Ratchasima province, Thailand. Structured-questionnaires were used to interview 226 women (cases) who had attended cervical cancer screening in the last five years and 226 women (controls) who had not. Multiple logistic regression was used to investigate the association between the area of residency and cervical cancer screening uptake.

RESULTS

After controlling for parity, marital status and duration of hormonal contraceptive use, an association between the area of residence and cervical cancer screening uptake could not demonstrated (ORadj 1.27, 95%CI: 0.79, 2.04).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence to suggest remoteness to health care center led to lower cervical cancer screening uptake.

Reasons for non-participation in population-based abdominal aortic aneurysm screening

Background

A population-based screening programme for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) started in 2010 in Stockholm County, Sweden. This present study used individual data from Sweden's extensive healthcare registries to identify the reasons for non-participation in the AAA screening programme.

Methods

All 65-year-old men in Stockholm are invited to screening for AAA; this study included all men invited from July 2010 to July 2012. Participants and non-participants were compared for socioeconomic factors, travel distance to the examination centre and healthcare use. The influence of these factors on participation was analysed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression models.

Results

The participation rate for AAA screening was 77·6 per cent (18 876 of 24 319 men invited). The prevalence of AAA (aortic diameter more than 2·9 cm) among participants was 1·4 per cent. The most important reasons for non-participation in the multivariable regression analyses were: recent immigration (within 5 years) (odds ratio (OR) 3·25, 95 per cent confidence interval 1·94 to 5·47), low income (OR 2·76, 2·46 to 3·10), marital status single or divorced (OR 2·23, 2·08 to 2·39), low level of education (OR 1·28, 1·16 to 1·40) and long travel distance (OR 1·23, 1·10 to 1·37). Non-participants had a higher incidence of stroke (4·5 versus 2·8 per cent; P &lt; 0·001) and chronic pulmonary disease (2·9 versus 1·3 per cent; P &lt; 0·001). Daily smoking was more common in residential areas where the participation rate for AAA screening was low.

Conclusion

Efforts to improve participation in AAA screening should target the groups with low income, a low level of education and immigrants. The higher morbidity in the non-participant group, together with a higher rate of smoking, make it probable that this group also has a high risk of AAA.