A R Aro1, H J de Koning, P Absetz, M Schreck. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Health Promotion, National Public Health Institute, Helsinki, Finland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study psychosocial predictors of attendance at an organised breast cancer screening programme. SETTING: Finnish screening programme based on personal first round invitations in 1992-94, and with 90% attendance rate. METHODS:Attenders (n = 946) belonged to a 10% random sample (n = 1680 women, age 50, response rate 64%) of the target population (n = 16,886), non-attenders (n = 641, 38%) came from the whole target population. Predictors were measured one month before the screening invitation. Measures included items for social and behavioural factors, Breast Cancer Susceptibility Scale, Illness Attitude Scale, Health Locus of Control Scale, Anxiety Inventory, and Depression Inventory. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to predict attendance. RESULTS: Those most likely to attend were working, middle income, and averagely educated women, who had not had a mass mammogram recently, but who regularly visited gynaecologists, attended for Pap smear screening, practised breast self examination, and who did not smoke. Low confidence in their own capabilities in breast cancer prevention, overoptimism about the sensitivity of mammography, and perception of breast cancer risk as moderate were also predictive of attendance. Expectation of pain at mammography was predictive of non-attendance. CONCLUSION: Mammography screening organised as a public health service was well accepted. A recent mammogram, high reliance on self control of breast cancer, and an expectation of pain at mammography deterred attendance at screening. Further information about these factors and health information on screening are needed.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To study psychosocial predictors of attendance at an organised breast cancer screening programme. SETTING: Finnish screening programme based on personal first round invitations in 1992-94, and with 90% attendance rate. METHODS: Attenders (n = 946) belonged to a 10% random sample (n = 1680 women, age 50, response rate 64%) of the target population (n = 16,886), non-attenders (n = 641, 38%) came from the whole target population. Predictors were measured one month before the screening invitation. Measures included items for social and behavioural factors, Breast Cancer Susceptibility Scale, Illness Attitude Scale, Health Locus of Control Scale, Anxiety Inventory, and Depression Inventory. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to predict attendance. RESULTS: Those most likely to attend were working, middle income, and averagely educated women, who had not had a mass mammogram recently, but who regularly visited gynaecologists, attended for Pap smear screening, practised breast self examination, and who did not smoke. Low confidence in their own capabilities in breast cancer prevention, overoptimism about the sensitivity of mammography, and perception of breast cancer risk as moderate were also predictive of attendance. Expectation of pain at mammography was predictive of non-attendance. CONCLUSION: Mammography screening organised as a public health service was well accepted. A recent mammogram, high reliance on self control of breast cancer, and an expectation of pain at mammography deterred attendance at screening. Further information about these factors and health information on screening are needed.
Authors: M Van Goethem; D Mortelmans; E Bruyninckx; I Verslegers; I Biltjes; E Van Hove; A De Schepper Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2002-11-14 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Magdalena Esteva; Joana Ripoll; Alfonso Leiva; Carmen Sánchez-Contador; Francisca Collado Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2008-11-13 Impact factor: 3.295