| Literature DB >> 25103189 |
Olumide A Abiodun1, Oluwatosin O Olu-Abiodun, John O Sotunsa, Francis A Oluwole.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is a disease of public health importance affecting many women and contributing to avoidably high levels of cancer deaths in Nigeria. In spite of the relative ease of prevention, the incidence is on the increase. This study aimed to determine the effect of health education on the awareness, knowledge and perception of cervical cancer and screening among women in rural Nigerian communities.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25103189 PMCID: PMC4133628 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-814
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Socio-demographic characteristics of participants
| Factors | Experimental group N = 350 (%) | Control group N = 350 (%) | Test statistic value ( | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| 25-34 years | 253 (72.3) | 246 (70.3) | 0.703 | 0.873 |
| 35-44 years | 62 (17.7) | 65 (18.6) | ||
| 45-54 years | 23 (6.6) | 28 (8.0) | ||
| 55-64 years | 12 (3.4) | 11 (3.1) | ||
|
| 350 | 350 | ||
|
| ||||
| Married | 285 (81.4) | 276 (78.9) | 4.820 | 0.185 |
| Single | 59 (16.9) | 58 (16.6) | ||
| Divorced | 2 (0.6) | 4 (1.1) | ||
| Widowed | 4 (1.1) | 12 (3.4) | ||
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| Christianity | 251 (71.7) | 238 (68.0) | 2.263 | 0.520 |
| Islam | 98 (28.0) | 109 (31.1) | ||
| Traditional | 1 (0.3) | 2 (0.6) | ||
| Atheist | 0 (0.0) | 1 (0.3) | ||
|
| 350 | 350 | ||
|
| ||||
| Yoruba | 321 (91.7) | 324 (92.6) | 1.943 | 0.584 |
| Hausa | 8 (2.3) | 4 (1.1) | ||
| Igbo | 13 (3.7) | 16 (4.6) | ||
| Others | 8 (2.3) | 6 (1.7) | ||
|
| 350 | 350 | ||
|
| ||||
| No formal education | 19 (5.4) | 24 (6.9) | 1.192 | 0.755 |
| Primary school | 110 (31.4) | 105 (30.0) | ||
| Secondary school | 178 (50.9) | 172 (49.1) | ||
| Post-secondary | 43 (12.3) | 49 (14.0) | ||
|
| 350 | 350 | ||
|
| ||||
| Self employed | 267 (76.3) | 269 (76.9) | 1.142 | 0.888 |
| Employed | 43 (12.3) | 40 (11.4) | ||
| Student | 11 (3.1) | 15 (4.3) | ||
| Unemployed | 27 (7.7) | 25 (7.1) | ||
| Retired | 2 (0.6) | 1 (0.3) | ||
|
| 350 | 350 | ||
|
| ||||
| 0- 4,999 | 95 (27.1) | 98 (28.0) | 2.129 | 0.831 |
| 5,000- 9,999 | 115 (32.9) | 122 (34.9) | ||
| 10,000- 14,999 | 59 (16.9) | 49 (14.0) | ||
| 15,000- 19,999 | 23 (6.6) | 21 (6.0) | ||
| 20,000- 24,999 | 29 (8.3) | 25 (7.1) | ||
| 25,000 and Above | 29 (8.3) | 35 (10.0) | ||
|
| 350 | 350 |
Participants’ awareness, knowledge and perception of cervical cancer and uptake of cervical screening at baseline
| Variable | Intervention | Control | Test value | p value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ever heard of cervical cancer | 59 (16.9%) | 50 (14.3%) | p = 0.404* | |
| Ever heard of cervical screening | 36 (10.3%) | 38 (10.9%) | p = 0.902* | |
| Ever had cervical screening | 15 (4.3%) | 12 (3.4%) | p = 0.695* | |
| Willingness to have cervical screening | 314 (89.7%) | 320 (91.4%) | P = 0.518* | |
| Mean knowledge score | 1.75 (SD = 5.65)α | 2.03 (SD = 5.77)α | t = 0.649 (df = 698) | P = 0.517 |
| Mean perception score | 1.13 (SD = 0.77)α | 1.16 (SD = 0.83)α | t = 0.496 (df = 698) | P = 0.620 |
*Fisher’s exact test was used, αmean (SD = standard deviation).
Participants’ awareness, knowledge and perception of cervical cancer and uptake of cervical screening at post intervention
| Variable | Intervention | Control | Test value | p value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ever heard of cervical cancer | 325 (100.0%) | 45 (15.6%) | p < 0.0001* | |
| Ever heard of cervical screening | 325 (100.0%) | 31 (10.7%) | p < 0.0001* | |
| Ever had cervical screening | 27 (8.3%) | 11 (3.8%) | p = 0.0281* | |
| Willingness to have cervical screening | 300 (92.3%) | 270 (93.4%) | P = 0.6402* | |
| Mean knowledge score | 25.69 (SD = 6.20)α | 2.22 (SD = 6.04)α | t = 47.391 (df = 612) | p < 0.0001 |
| Mean perception score | 4.43 (SD = 0.92)α | 1.17 (SD = 0.88)α | t = 44.7316 (df = 612) | p < 0.0001 |
*Fisher’s exact test was used, αmean (SD = standard deviation).
The effect of health education among study participants
| Knowledge score (0–40) | INTERVENTION | CONTROL | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline n = 350 frequency (%) | Post intervention n = 325 frequency (%) | % change | Statistic (P) | Beginning of study n = 350 frequency (%) | End of study n = 289 frequency (%) | % change | Statistic (P) | |
| Ever heard of cervical cancer | 59 (16.9) | 325 (100.0) | +83.1 | (p < 0.0001*) | 50 (14.3) | 45 (15.6) | +1.3 | (p = 0.657*) |
| Ever heard of cervical screening | 36 (10.3) | 325 (100.0) | +94.6 | (p < 0.0001*) | 38 (10.9) | 31 (10.7) | −0.2 | (p = 1.000*) |
| Ever had cervical screening | 15 (4.3) | 27 (8.3) | +4.0 | (p = 0.038*) | 12 (3.4) | 11 (3.8) | +0.4 | (p = 0.834*) |
| Willingness to have cervical screening | 314 (89.7) | 300 (92.3) | +2.6 | (p = 0.283*) | 320 (91.4) | 270 (93.4) | +2.0 | (p = 0.373*) |
| Mean knowledge score | 1.75 ± 5.65α | 25.69 ± 6.20α | t = 52.48 (p < 0.0001) | 2.03 ± 5.77α | 2.22 ± 6.04α | t = 0.406 (p = 0.685) | ||
| Mean perception score | 1.13 ± 0.77α | 4.43 ± 0.92α | t = 50.66 (p < 0.0001) | 1.16 ± 0.83α | 1.17 ± 0.88α | t = 0.148 (p = 0.883) | ||
*Fisher’s exact test was used, αmean ± Standard deviation.
Barriers to uptake of cervical screening
| Barriers | INTERVENTION | CONTROL | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline n = 335 frequency (%) | Post intervention n = 298 frequency (%) | % change |
| Beginning of study n = 338 frequency (%) | End of study n = 278 frequency (%) | % change |
| |
| Lack of awareness | 315 (94.0) | 0 (0.0) | −94 | 308 (91.1) | 247 (88.8) | 2.3 | ||
| Lack of access to screening services | 12 (3.6) | 298 (100.0) | 96.4 | 19 (5.6) | 17 (6.1) | 0.5 | ||
| Poor quality of health services | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 | 586.7 (P < 0.0001) | 2 (0.6) | 2 (0.7) | 0.1 | 2.688 (P = 0.6113) |
| Cost of service | 6 (1.8) | 0 (0.0) | −1.8 | 6 (1.8) | 5 (1.8) | 0 | ||
| Lack of interest | 2 (0.6) | 0 (0.0) | −0.6 | 3 (0.9) | 7 (2.5) | 1.6 | ||