Literature DB >> 16596296

Impact of women's experiences during mammography on adherence to rescreening (United States).

Lucy A Peipins1, Jean A Shapiro, Janet Kay Bobo, Zahava Berkowitz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between womens' experiences during mammography and their likelihood of being rescreened after receiving a negative or benign mammogram.
METHODS: Telephone interview and medical record data were collected from a random sample of enrollees from four states in a national screening program targeting uninsured and underinsured women at least 30 months after they had undergone an index mammogram in 1997. We calculated 30-month rescreening rates by prior mammography characteristics including pain and embarrassment, worry, convenience of appointment time, treatment by staff, and financial considerations.
RESULTS: Of the 2,000 women in the sampling frame, 1,895 (93.6%) were located, 1,685 (88.6%) were interviewed and 1,680 provided data required for our analysis. Overall, 81.5% of the women had undergone rescreening. More than 90% of the women reported being 'satisfied' or 'very satisfied' with treatment by facility staff, facility location and wait time during the appointment. Statistically significant decreased rescreening rates were seen for women who reported feeling embarrassed and for women reporting dissatisfaction with ability to schedule a convenient appointment time.
CONCLUSION: These results suggest that providing additional reassurance and privacy may increase rescreening rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16596296     DOI: 10.1007/s10552-005-0447-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Causes Control        ISSN: 0957-5243            Impact factor:   2.506


  18 in total

1.  The demographic, system, and psychosocial origins of mammographic screening disparities: prediction of initiation versus maintenance screening among immigrant and non-immigrant women.

Authors:  Nathan S Consedine
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2012-08

2.  Longitudinal predictors of nonadherence to maintenance of mammography.

Authors:  Jennifer M Gierisch; Jo Anne Earp; Noel T Brewer; Barbara K Rimer
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 4.254

3.  Assessment of participant satisfaction with upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in South Korea.

Authors:  Hoo-Yeon Lee; Sun Mi Lim; Mi Ah Han; Jae Kwan Jun; Kui Son Choi; Myung-Il Hahm; Eun-Cheol Park
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-09-28       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Effects of program scale-up on time to resolution for patients with abnormal screening mammography results.

Authors:  Simon Craddock Lee; Robin T Higashi; Joanne M Sanders; Hong Zhu; Stephen J Inrig; Caroline Mejias; Keith E Argenbright; Jasmin A Tiro
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2018-08-23       Impact factor: 2.506

5.  Breast and cervical cancer screening among women in metropolitan areas of the United States by county-level commuting time to work and use of public transportation, 2004 and 2006.

Authors:  Steven S Coughlin; Jessica King
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2010-03-19       Impact factor: 3.295

6.  Breast and cervical cancer screening practices among disabled women aged 40-75: does quality of the experience matter?

Authors:  Sze Y Liu; Melissa A Clark
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.681

7.  The National Prevention Strategy and breast cancer screening: scientific evidence for public health action.

Authors:  Marcus Plescia; Mary C White
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2013-07-18       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  Are health-care relationships important for mammography adherence in Latinas?

Authors:  Vanessa B Sheppard; Judy Wang; Bin Yi; Toni Michelle Harrison; Shibao Feng; Elmer E Huerta; Jeanne S Mandelblatt
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-10-07       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Barriers and facilitators related to mammography use among lower educated Mexican women in the USA.

Authors:  Silvia Tejeda; Beti Thompson; Gloria D Coronado; Diane P Martin
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2009-01-17       Impact factor: 4.634

10.  Mammography screening after risk-tailored messages: the women improving screening through education and risk assessment (WISER) randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  Joann Bodurtha; John M Quillin; Kelly A Tracy; Joseph Borzelleca; Donna McClish; Diane Baer Wilson; Resa M Jones; Julie Quillin; Deborah Bowen
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2009 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.681

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.