Barriers and Facilitators of Colonoscopy Screening Among Latino Men in a Colorectal Cancer Screening Promotion Program

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death among Latino men in the United States, yet they have low screening rates. This study explored barriers and facilitators of colonoscopy screening among Latino participants in a CRC screening promotion program. Six focus groups were conducted, in Spanish, with 45 Latino men, of which 28 had received and 17 had not received a colonoscopy. Analysis of the discussion transcripts identified barriers to CRC screening, facilitators to CRC screening, and recommendations for health information dissemination. There was consensus among all participants that they had not received adequate information on colonoscopy screening from their health care providers. Unscreened participants wanted more details about the colonoscopy procedure and bowel preparation. Screened men were more knowledgeable than unscreened men about CRC, the colonoscopy procedure, and the benefits of early detection. Participants also expressed their fears, concerns, and perceptions of stigma in relation to colonoscopy screening. They described family and personal testimonials as facilitators to engaging in colorectal cancer screening. Findings underscore the need for ongoing research and educational efforts to address personal and cultural stigma surrounding colonoscopy and CRC, particularly in underserved communities. Study findings also highlight the danger of missing out on opportunities to increase CRC screening when colonoscopy is the primary screening option offered. Additional research is needed to ensure trust in the health care system and to examine the effectiveness of testimonials on CRC screening among Latino men.

Organization-Based Factors Bearing on Provider Screening and Referral Practices for Women Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence

Essential steps in the provision of health care for women exposed to intimate partner violence (IPV) are screening and referral for specialized services, as might occur in primary care settings. Prior to participating in a cross-disciplinary IPV training program, medical care (N = 223) and social/behavioral practitioners (N = 197) completed a survey that ascertained current practices, provisions, and perceived barriers related to IPV screening and referral. Roughly half of the study participants did not routinely screen their patients/clients for IPV, with no differences for the professional groupings. Utilization of referral resources was significantly lower for medical care providers, 78.5% of whom did not use any. Perceived barriers to screening and referral were examined as practitioner-based and organization-based, and we identified tangible provisions (protocols and practice materials) as a relevant variable. As we conjectured, organization-based barriers were more strongly associated with lower rates of screening and referral than were practitioner-based barriers, regardless of professional grouping. Moreover, tangible provisions, controlling for perceived barriers, significantly added to routine screening and frequency of referral resources usage, particularly for medical care providers. Results are discussed in the context of a systems-level approach to improving IPV services in health care with organizational practice enhancements.

Encouraging Mammograms Using Behavioral Economics: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Chile

OBJECTIVES

This article illustrates the effect of a direct mail campaign that used insights from behavioral economics and psychology to increase the number of free mammograms in Chilean women aged 50 years or older.

METHODS

We hypothesized 4 barriers in obtaining a mammogram based on previous literature and focus group analysis. A behavioral economic approach providing incentives was used to help overcome these barriers. We accessed a unique data set, which comprised 12 000 women 50 years old or older, with private health insurance who have not had a mammogram for 24 or more months. We conducted a randomized controlled trial with 8 treatments, each involving a specific combination of messages.

RESULTS

The intervention overall led to a 167% increase in the use of free mammograms, a 1.13% to 3.03% average increase from the control to treatment groups, respectively. Regarding barriers, we found that all messages were effective, with a slightly larger and persistent effect for the less complex ones in terms of information. This finding illustrates the benefits of keeping the message simple.

CONCLUSIONS

Finally, these results suggest a successful public policy for increasing use of free mammography programs. Moreover, they are potentially transferable because the study considered decision-making heuristics that are not specific to one culture or social context.

Knowledge, utilization and barriers of cervical cancer screening among women attending selected district hospitals in Kigali - Rwanda

Background

Cervical cancer is the third most common cancer attacking women globally, and the second in Eastern Africa where Rwanda is located. Regular screening is an effective prevention approach for cervical cancer. Despite that, the screening rate for cervical cancer in Africa is estimated between 10% and 70%, with a number of barriers. This is especially the case in sub-Saharan Africa. In Rwanda, there is limited literature on the rate of use of screening services or the barriers to cervical screening.

Objective

To assess knowledge, utilization, and barriers of cervical cancer screening among women attending selected district hospitals in Kigali, Rwanda.

Methods

A descriptive cross-sectional study with a structured questionnaire was used to collect data. Nominal 'yes' or 'no' questions were used to gather data on knowledge and utilisation of cervical cancer and its screening. Likert-type scale questions were used to identify different barriers to screening services. Data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Respondents were selected by systematic random sampling from the database of women attending gynaecology services at three district hospitals in Kigali, Rwanda.

Results

Three hundred and twenty-nine women responded to the survey. Half of the respondents (n = 165) had high knowledge level scores on cervical cancer screening. The cervical cancer screening rate was 28.3%. Utilization of screening was associated with knowledge (P = 0.000, r = -0.392) and selected demographic factors (P = 0.000). Individual barriers included poor knowledge on availability of screening services, community barriers included living in a rural area, and health provider and systems barriers included lack of awareness campaigns, negative attitudes of healthcare providers toward clients, and long waiting times; all barriers limit the access to screening services.

Conclusion

A low rate of cervical cancer screening was identified for women attending selected district hospitals in Kigali-Rwanda due to various barriers. On-going education on cervical cancer and its screening is highly recommended. It is important that trained health providers encourage their clients to have cervical cancer screening and work to reduce related barriers.

Patterns of gynaecological check-up and their association with body mass index within the CONSTANCES cohort

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the relationship between patterns of gynaecological check-up and body mass index while accounting for various determinants of health care use.

METHODS

Sequence analysis and clustering were used to highlight patterns of gynaecological check-up, which included the regularity of breast and cervical cancer screening and visits to the gynaecologist over four years, among 6182 women aged 54-65 included in the CONSTANCES cohort between 2013 and 2015 in France. Multinomial logistic regressions were used to study the association between these patterns and women's body mass index.

RESULTS

We identified four patterns of gynaecological check-up, from (A) no or inappropriate check-up (20%) to (D) almost one visit to the gynaecologist every year, overscreening for cervical cancer and frequent use of opportunistic breast cancer screening (12%). From patterns A to D, the proportion of obese women decreased and that of women with normal body mass index increased. Obese and overweight women underwent more breast than cervical cancer screening and were less often overscreened than normal weight women. These differences were only partly explained by the lower socioeconomic situation of overweight and obese women. Beyond the financial barrier, the screening modality and the type of exam may play a role. Among women who were screened for cervical cancer, obese and overweight women were less often screened by a gynaecologist.

CONCLUSION

Further efforts should be made to enhance the take-up of screening among obese women who are deterred by the healthcare system.

Psychological distress associated with cancer screening: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Current national cancer screening recommendations include the potential risk of psychological harm related to screening. However, data on the relation of psychological distress to cancer screening is limited. The authors conducted a systematic review to assess psychological distress associated with cancer screening procedures.

METHODS

Studies that administered measures of psychological distress between 2 weeks before and 1 month after the screening procedure were included.

RESULTS

In total, 22 eligible studies met criteria for review, including 13 observational trials and 9 randomized controlled trials. Eligible studies used a broad range of validated and unvalidated measures. Anxiety was the most commonly assessed construct and was measured using the State Trait Anxiety Inventory. Studies included breast, colorectal, prostate, lung, and cervical screening procedures. Distress was low across procedures, with the exception of colorectal screening. Distress did not vary according to the time at which distress was measured. None of the studies were conducted exclusively with the intention of assessing distress at the time of screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of low distress during the time of cancer screening suggests that distress might not be a widespread barrier to screening among adults who undergo screening. However, more studies are needed using validated measures of distress to further understand the extent to which screening may elicit psychological distress and impede adherence to national screening recommendations. Cancer 2017;123:3882-94. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Prevalence and Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening in Karachi, Pakistan: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Smokers and Physicians

Background

Early detection of lung cancer using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) can potentially reduce morbidity and mortality. However, LDCT for lung cancer screening, especially in low income countries, has been underutilized. The objective of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and the potential personal, social, and economic barriers of lung cancer screening using LDCT.

Methods

A total sample of 156 smokers and 200 general physicians was collected during December 2016-February 2017 from community settings in Karachi, Pakistan. Two separate questionnaires were constructed to characterize participants’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding lung cancer screening. Screening-eligible smokers and physicians were asked to identify patient barriers to screening and were asked their opinion regarding most effective approach for increasing awareness of screening guidelines.

Results

The majority of smokers' (n=91, 58.3%) and physicians' (n=131, 65.7%) beliefs about the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) eligibility criteria were inconsistent with the actual recommendations. Major barriers to screening included financial cost, lack of patient counseling and health anxiety related to screening. Over two-thirds (n=105, 67.3%) of smokers were receptive to further information about LDCT screening, and half (n=78, 50.0%) favored one-on-one counseling by their physician, compared to other media. Only one-third (n=65, 33.3%) of physicians reported use of LDCT screening, although 54.5% (n=108) felt that screening implementation would be very effective in their practice.

Conclusion

LDCT screening is currently an uncommon practice in Pakistan. Financial cost, inadequate doctor-patient communication, and lack of awareness of guidelines among both patients and physicians are the major barriers in the utilization of LDCT screening.

Factors Influencing Pap Screening Use Among African Immigrant Women

PURPOSE

Papanicolau (Pap) screenings disparities exist for immigrant women in the United States. This study sought to have an understanding of factors influencing Pap screening among sub-Saharan African immigrant women.

METHOD

This is a qualitative descriptive study. Women were recruited from the community and by word of mouth following institutional review board approval. Data were gathered through in-depth focus group and demographic questionnaires. Interview sessions were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analyzed for themes.

FINDINGS

Twenty-two women aged 24 to 65 years were interviewed. Barriers to screening included low knowledge of screening, cost, cultural beliefs, fear and communication issues. Motivators to improve Pap use include provider's recommendations, enlightenment, and family support.

DISCUSSION

Interventions addressing the barriers peculiar to this population may alleviate these barriers and improve Pap screening use in this population. Providers have the opportunity to influence screening attitudes of African-born women by providing awareness and patient-targeted interventions.

Barriers impeding serologic screening for celiac disease in clinically high-prevalence populations

BACKGROUND

Celiac disease is present in ~1% of the general population in the United States and Europe. Despite the availability of inexpensive serologic screening tests, ~85% of individuals with celiac disease remain undiagnosed and there is an average delay in diagnosis of symptomatic individuals with celiac disease that ranges from ~5.8-11 years. This delay is often attributed to the use of a case-based approach for detection rather than general population screening for celiac disease, and deficiencies at the level of health care professionals. This study aimed to assess if patient-centered barriers have a role in impeding serologic screening for celiac disease in individuals from populations that are clinically at an increased risk for celiac disease.

METHODS

119 adults meeting study inclusion criteria for being at a higher risk for celiac disease were recruited from the general population. Participants completed a survey/questionnaire at the William K. Warren Medical Research Center for Celiac Disease that addressed demographic information, celiac disease related symptoms (gastrointestinal and extraintestinal), family history, co-morbid diseases and conditions associated with celiac disease, and patient-centered barriers to screening for celiac disease. All participants underwent serologic screening for celiac disease using the IgA tissue transglutaminase antibody (IgA tTG) and, if positive, testing for IgA anti-endomysial antibody (IgA EMA) as a confirmatory test.

RESULTS

Two barriers to serologic testing were significant across the participant pool. These were participants not knowing they were at risk for celiac disease before learning of the study, and participants not knowing where to get tested for celiac disease. Among participants with incomes less than $25,000/year and those less than the median age, not having a doctor to order the test was a significant barrier, and this strongly correlated with not having health insurance. Symptoms and co-morbid conditions were similar among those whose IgA tTG were negative and those who tested positive.

CONCLUSION

There are significant patient-centered barriers that impede serologic screening and contribute to the delayed detection and diagnosis of celiac disease. These barriers may be lessened by greater education of the public and health care professionals about celiac disease symptoms, risk factors, and serologic testing.