| Literature DB >> 27918456 |
Carmen W H Chan1, Kai Chow Choi2, Rosa S Wong3, Ka Ming Chow4, Winnie K W So5, Doris Y P Leung6, Wendy W T Lam7, William Goggins8.
Abstract
Under-screening may increase the risk of cervical cancer in middle-aged women. This study aimed to investigate cervical cancer screening behaviour and its predictors among women aged 50 years or above. A population-based sample of 959 women was recruited by telephone from domestic households in Hong Kong, using random methods, and a structured questionnaire developed to survey participants. Multivariable logistic regressions were performed to examine the factors independently associated with cervical screening behaviour. Nearly half the sample (48%) had never had a cervical smear test. Multivariable analyses showed that age, educational level, marital status, family history of cancer, smoking status, use of complementary therapy, recommendation from health professionals, and believing that regular visits to a doctor or a Chinese herbalist were good for their health were predictors of cervical screening behaviour. Misconceptions concerned with menopause may reduce women's perceived susceptibility to cervical cancer, especially if they are 50 or above, and exert a negative effect on their screening behaviour. Healthcare professionals should actively approach these high-risk groups-older unmarried women, smokers, those less educated and who are generally not much concerned with their health.Entities:
Keywords: Chinese women; cervical cancer; menopause; population-based study; protection motivation theory; screening behaviour
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27918456 PMCID: PMC5201336 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph13121195
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Socio-demographic characteristics and health status of the respondents (n = 959).
| Age (Years) | 50–59 | 418 (43.6%) |
| 60–69 | 232 (24.2%) | |
| 70–79 | 202 (21.1%) | |
| 80 or Above | 107 (11.2%) | |
| Education Level | Primary or Below | 510 (53.3%) |
| Secondary | 352 (36.8%) | |
| Matriculation or Above | 95 (9.9%) | |
| Marital Status | Single/Divorced/Widowed | 284 (29.9%) |
| Married/Cohabiting | 665 (70.1%) | |
| Employment Status | Unemployed | 815 (85.1%) |
| Employed | 143 (14.9%) | |
| Monthly Household Income (HK$) | <10,000 | 278 (29.4%) |
| 10,000–29,999 | 200 (21.1%) | |
| ≥30,000 | 102 (10.8%) | |
| Don’t Know/Declined to Disclose | 366 (38.7%) | |
| Chronic Illness | Any Confirmed Chronic Illness | 433 (45.2%) |
| Serious Disease | Ever Had a Serious Disease or Cancer | 81 (8.4%) |
| Family History of Cancer | No/Don’t Know | 746 (77.8%) |
| Yes | 213 (22.2%) | |
| Smoking Status | Never Smoked | 925 (96.5%) |
| Ex-Smoker | 14 (1.5%) | |
| Current Smoker | 20 (2.1%) | |
Data are presented as frequencies (%).
Health-related perceptions and utilisation of complementary therapies.
| Perceived Health Status | Excellent/very Good/Good | 365 (38.1%) |
| Fair/Poor | 594 (61.9%) | |
| Believing that the Following Practices are Good for Health | Exercise | 734 (76.5%) |
| A Healthy Diet | 715 (74.6%) | |
| Visiting a Doctor Regularly | 462 (48.2%) | |
| Visiting a Chinese Herbalist Regularly | 242 (25.2%) | |
| Taking Dietary Supplements | 241 (25.1%) | |
| Perceived Susceptibility to Cancer (Range: 1 = Not at All Likely to 10 = Extremely Likely) | ≤5 | 621 (64.8%) |
| >5 | 55 (5.7%) | |
| Unsure | 283 (29.5%) | |
| Ever Used the Following Complementary Therapies | Acupuncture | 174 (18.1%) |
| Cupping | 115 (12.0%) | |
| herbal Remedies | 337 (35.1%) | |
| Bone Setting | 225 (23.5%) | |
| Chinese Massage | 153 (16.0%) | |
| Use of Complementary Therapy Index | 0 (≤50th Percentile) | 446 (46.5%) |
| 1–2 (>50th–75th Percentile) | 251 (26.2%) | |
| ≥3 (>75th Percentile) | 262 (27.3%) | |
Data are presented as frequencies (%).
Cervical cancer screening behaviour—cervical smear test.
| Any Health Professional Recommended a Cervical Smear Test | No/Unsure | 876 (91.3%) |
| Yes | 83 (8.7%) | |
| Ever Had a Cervical Smear Test | No | 500 (52.1%) |
| Yes | 457 (47.7%) | |
| Unsure | 2 (0.2%) | |
| Time since the Most Recent Test | <1 Year | 75 (16.4%) |
| 1–2 Years | 163 (35.7%) | |
| 3–4 Years | 99 (21.7%) | |
| 5–6 Years | 44 (9.6%) | |
| >6 Years | 45 (9.8%) | |
| Can’t Remember | 31 (6.8%) | |
| Ever Had an Abnormal Test Result | No | 426 (93.2%) |
| Yes | 29 (6.3%) | |
| Unsure | 2 (0.4%) | |
| The Three Main Reasons for the Most Recent Cervical Smear Test | 1. Regular Medical Check-Up | 351 (76.8%) |
| 2. Prompted by Local Signs and Symptoms * | 28 (6.1%) | |
| 3. Physician’s Recommendation | 21 (4.6%) | |
| The Three Most Important Reasons For Not Having A Cervical Screening | 1. Not Necessary | 331 (66.2%) |
| 2. Healthy All Along | 43 (8.6%) | |
| 3. Other Unspecified Reason | 24 (4.8%) | |
Data are presented as frequencies (%). * Having pain, bleeding, lumps or polyps.
Factors associated with ever having had a cervical smear test.
| Factors | Ever Had a Cervical Smear Test | ORU | ORA (95% CI) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No ( | Yes ( | ||||||
| - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| Age (Years) | 50–59 (Reference) | 141 (33.8%) | 276 (66.2%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| 60–69 | 120 (51.7%) | 112 (48.3%) | 0.48 | <0.001 | 0.53 (0.36–0.77) | 0.001 | |
| 70–79 | 145 (71.8%) | 57 (28.2%) | 0.20 | <0.001 | 0.29 (0.18–0.44) | <0.001 | |
| 80 or Above | 94 (88.7%) | 12 (11.3%) | 0.07 | <0.001 | 0.12 (0.06–0.23) | <0.001 | |
| Education Level | Primary or Below (Reference) | 330 (64.8%) | 179 (35.2%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Secondary | 140 (39.9%) | 211 (60.1%) | 2.78 | <0.001 | 1.55 (1.10–2.19) | 0.012 | |
| Matriculation or Above | 29 (30.5%) | 66 (69.5%) | 4.20 | <0.001 | 2.59 (1.49–4.48) | 0.001 | |
| Employment Status | Unemployed (Reference) | 450 (55.3%) | 364 (44.7%) | 1 | - | NS | - |
| Employed | 50 (35.2%) | 92 (64.8%) | 2.27 | <0.001 | - | - | |
| Monthly Household Income (HK$) | <10,000 (Reference) | 180 (64.7%) | 98 (35.3%) | 1 | - | NS | - |
| 10,000–29,999 | 81 (40.5%) | 119 (59.5%) | 2.70 | <0.001 | - | - | |
| ≥30,000 | 26 (25.5%) | 76 (74.5%) | 5.37 | <0.001 | - | - | |
| Don’t Know/Decline to Disclose | 206 (56.6%) | 158 (43.4%) | 1.41 | 0.037 | - | - | |
| Marital Status | Single/Divorced/Widowed (Reference) | 194 (68.3%) | 90 (31.7%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Married/Cohabiting | 302 (45.6%) | 361 (54.4%) | 2.58 | <0.001 | 1.80 (1.25–2.58) | 0.001 | |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| Any Confirmed Chronic Illness | No (Reference) | 252 (48.1%) | 272 (51.9%) | 1 | - | NS | - |
| Yes | 248 (57.3%) | 185 (42.7%) | 0.69 | 0.005 | - | - | |
| Ever Had A Serious Disease or Cancer | No (Reference) | 462 (52.7%) | 414 (47.3%) | 1 | - | NE | - |
| Yes | 38 (46.9%) | 43 (53.1%) | 1.26 | 0.316 | - | ||
| Family History of Cancer | No/Don’t Know (Reference) | 428 (57.5%) | 316 (42.5%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Yes | 72 (33.8%) | 141 (66.2%) | 2.65 | <0.001 | 1.89 (1.30–2.73) | 0.001 | |
| Smoking Status | Never Smoked (Reference) | 473 (51.2%) | 450 (48.8%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Ex-Smoker/Current Smoker | 27 (79.4%) | 7 (20.6%) | 0.27 | 0.002 | 0.28 (0.11–0.72) | 0.008 | |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| Use of Complementary Therapy Index | 0 (≤50th Percentile) | 285 (64.2%) | 159 (35.8%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| 1–2 (>50th–75th Percentile) | 139 (55.4%) | 112 (44.6%) | 1.44 | 0.022 | 1.35 (0.93–1.98) | 0.118 | |
| ≥3 (>75th Percentile) | 76 (29.0%) | 186 (71.0%) | 4.39 | <0.001 | 2.07 (1.38–3.12) | <0.001 | |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| Health Professional Recommended the Test | No/Unsure (Reference) | 481 (55.0%) | 393 (45.0%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Yes | 19 (22.9%) | 64 (77.1%) | 4.12 | <0.001 | 4.04 (2.21–7.39) | <0.001 | |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| Perceived Health Status | Excellent/very good/good (Reference) | 180 (49.6%) | 183 (50.4%) | 1 | - | NS | - |
| Fair/Poor | 320 (53.9%) | 274 (46.1%) | 0.84 | 0.198 | - | - | |
| Thought Exercise was Good for Health | No (Reference) | 118 (52.7%) | 106 (47.3%) | 1 | - | NE | - |
| Yes | 382 (52.1%) | 351 (47.9%) | 1.02 | 0.882 | - | - | |
| Believed a Healthy Diet was Good for the Health | No (Reference) | 150 (61.5%) | 94 (38.5%) | 1 | - | NS | - |
| Yes | 350 (49.1%) | 363 (50.9%) | 1.66 | 0.001 | - | - | |
| Thought Visiting A Doctor Regularly Was Good For The Health | No (Reference) | 299 (60.3%) | 197 (39.7%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Yes | 201 (43.6%) | 260 (56.4%) | 1.96 | <0.001 | 2.09 (1.51–2.88) | <0.001 | |
| Thought Visiting a Chinese Herbalist Regularly was Good for the Health | No (Reference) | 422 (59.0%) | 293 (41.0%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Yes | 78 (32.2%) | 164 (67.8%) | 3.03 | <0.001 | 1.96 (1.31–2.93) | 0.001 | |
| Thought Taking Dietary Supplements was Good for the Health | No (Reference) | 399 (55.6%) | 318 (44.4%) | 1 | - | NS | - |
| Yes | 101 (42.1%) | 139 (57.9%) | 1.73 | <0.001 | - | - | |
| Perceived Susceptibility to Cancer (Range: 1 = Not at All Likely to 10 = Extremely Likely) | ≤5 (Reference) | 311 (50.2%) | 309 (49.8%) | 1 | - | NS | - |
| >5 | 24 (43.6%) | 31 (56.4%) | 1.30 | 0.355 | - | - | |
| Unsure | 165 (58.5%) | 117 (41.5%) | 0.71 | 0.020 | - | - | |
Reference: Reference group of the categorical variable; ORU: univariate odds ratio; ORA: odds ratio adjusted for other significant factors obtained from backward stepwise logistic regression analysis, using variables with p-value < 0.25 in univariate analysis as candidate variables; NS: not statistically significant in multivariate analysis; NE: not entered into multivariable analysis.
Associations between the retained variables in the multivariable logistic regression and those that showed significance in univariate but not in multivariable analysis.
| Variables | Employment Status a | Monthly Household Income b | Any Confirmed Chronic Illness a | Perceive a Healthy Diet Is Good for Health a | Perceive Taking Dietary Supplements Is Good for Health a | Perceived Susceptibility to Cancer b |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | −0.364 ( | 0.270 ( | 0.249 ( | −0.038 ( | −0.056 ( | 0.093 ( |
| Education Level | 0.216 ( | 0.294 ( | −0.117 ( | 0.092 ( | 0.094 ( | 0.081 ( |
| Marital Status | −0.005 ( | 0.222 ( | −0.175 ( | −0.016 ( | 0.011 ( | 0.067 ( |
| Family History of Cancer | 0.102 ( | 0.106 ( | −0.047 ( | 0.042 ( | 0.085 ( | 0.177 ( |
| Smoking Status | 0.031 ( | 0.067 ( | 0.018 ( | −0.095 ( | −0.007 ( | 0.052 ( |
| Use of complementary Therapy Index | 0.121 ( | 0.148 ( | −0.018 ( | 0.132 ( | 0.149 ( | 0.108 ( |
| Health Professional’s Recommendationt | 0.080 ( | 0.116 ( | 0.026 ( | 0.044 ( | 0.062 ( | 0.074 ( |
| Perceives Visiting a Doctor Regularly as Good for Health | 0.003 ( | 0.018 ( | 0.216 ( | 0.204 ( | 0.142 ( | 0.033 ( |
| Perceived Visiting a Chinese Herbalist Regularly as Good for Health | 0.109 ( | 0.102 ( | 0.017 ( | 0.114 ( | 0.129 ( | 0.083 ( |
a Spearmen correlation coefficient was calculated for both ordinal variables; b Cramer’s V calculated for either of the variables was nominal.
Factors associated with women aged 50–69 ever having had a cervical smear test.
| Factors | Ever Had a Cervical Smear Test | ORU | ORA (95% CI) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No ( | Yes ( | ||||||
| - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| Age (Years) | 50–59 (Reference) | 141 (33.8%) | 276 (66.2%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| 60–69 | 120 (51.7%) | 112 (48.3%) | 0.48 | <0.001 | 0.53 (0.36–0.78) | 0.001 | |
| Education Level | Primary or Below (Reference) | 129 (49.4%) | 132 (50.6%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Secondary | 113 (36.5%) | 197 (63.5%) | 1.70 | 0.002 | 1.45 (0.98–2.13) | 0.062 | |
| Matriculation or above | 18 (23.7%) | 58 (76.3%) | 3.15 | <0.001 | 2.67 (1.38–5.16) | 0.004 | |
| Employment Status | Unemployed (Reference) | 212 (41.8%) | 295 (58.2%) | 1 | - | NS | - |
| Employed | 49 (34.8%) | 92 (65.2%) | 1.35 | 0.131 | - | - | |
| Monthly Household Income (HK$) | <10,000 (Reference) | 84 (54.5%) | 70 (45.5%) | 1 | - | NS | - |
| 10,000–29,999 | 63 (36.0%) | 112 (64.0%) | 2.13 | 0.001 | - | - | |
| ≥30,000 | 23 (23.2%) | 76 (76.8%) | 3.97 | <0.001 | - | - | |
| Don’t Know/Decline to Disclose | 85 (40.7%) | 124 (59.3%) | 1.75 | 0.009 | - | - | |
| Marital Status | Single/Divorced/Widowed (Reference) | 71 (53.4%) | 62 (46.6%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Married/Cohabiting | 188 (37.0%) | 320 (63.0%) | 1.95 | 0.001 | 2.31 (1.46–3.64) | <0.001 | |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| Any Confirmed Chronic Illness | No (Reference) | 152 (37.8%) | 250 (62.2%) | 1 | - | NS | - |
| Yes | 109 (44.1%) | 138 (55.9%) | 0.77 | 0.111 | - | - | |
| Ever Had a Serious Disease or Cancer | No (Reference) | 236 (40.1%) | 353 (59.9%) | 1 | - | NE | - |
| Yes | 25 (41.7%) | 35 (58.3%) | 0.94 | 0.810 | - | - | |
| Family History of Cancer | No/Don’t Know (Reference) | 214 (45.0%) | 262 (55.0%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Yes | 47 (27.2%) | 126 (72.8%) | 2.19 | <0.001 | 1.81 (1.18–2.79) | 0.006 | |
| Smoking Status | Never Smoked (Reference) | 247 (39.3%) | 382 (60.7%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Ex-Smoker/Current Smoker | 14 (70.0%) | 6 (30.0%) | 0.28 | 0.009 | 0.28 (0.10–0.83) | 0.021 | |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| Use of Complementary Therapy Index | 0 (≤50th Percentile) | 147 (54.4%) | 123 (45.6%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| 1–2 (>50th–75th Percentile) | 61 (38.9%) | 96 (61.1%) | 1.88 | 0.002 | 1.68 (1.06–2.66) | 0.027 | |
| ≥3 (>75th Percentile) | 53 (23.9%) | 169 (76.1%) | 3.81 | <0.0001 | 2.51 (1.56–4.04) | <0.001 | |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| Health Professional Recommended the Test | No/Unsure (Reference) | 249 (42.7%) | 334 (57.3%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Yes | 12 (18.2%) | 54 (81.8%) | 3.36 | <0.001 | 3.38 (1.68–6.79) | 0.001 | |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| Perceived Health Status | Excellent/very Good/Good (Reference) | 95 (38.3%) | 153 (61.7%) | 1 | - | NE | - |
| Fair/Poor | 166 (41.4%) | 235 (58.6%) | 0.88 | 0.435 | - | - | |
| Perceived Exercise as Good for the Health | No (Reference) | 74 (42.5%) | 100 (57.5%) | 1 | - | NE | - |
| Yes | 187 (39.4%) | 288 (60.6%) | 1.14 | 0.467 | - | - | |
| Perceived a Healthy Diet as Good for the Health | No (Reference) | 76 (49.4%) | 78 (50.6%) | 1 | - | NS | - |
| Yes | 185 (37.4%) | 310 (62.6%) | 1.63 | 0.008 | - | - | |
| Perceive Visiting a Doctor Regularly as Good for the Health | No (Reference) | 183 (51.4%) | 173 (48.6%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Yes | 78 (26.6%) | 215 (73.4%) | 2.92 | <0.001 | 2.65 (1.81–3.87) | <0.001 | |
| Perceived Visiting a Chinese Herbalist Regularly as Good for the Health | No (Reference) | 220 (47.8%) | 240 (52.2%) | 1 | - | 1 | - |
| Yes | 41 (21.7%) | 148 (78.3%) | 3.31 | <0.001 | 1.90 (1.18–3.06) | 0.009 | |
| Perceived Taking Dietary Supplements as Good for the Health | No (Reference) | 211 (44.1%) | 267 (55.9%) | 1 | - | NS | - |
| Yes | 50 (29.2%) | 121 (70.8%) | 1.91 | 0.001 | - | - | |
| Perceived Susceptibility to Cancer (Range: 1 = not at All Likely to 10 = Extremely Likely) | ≤5 (Reference) | 160 (37.6%) | 265 (62.4%) | 1 | - | NS | - |
| >5 | 19 (41.3%) | 27 (58.7%) | 0.86 | 0.628 | - | - | |
| Unsure | 82 (46.1%) | 96 (53.9%) | 0.71 | 0.055 | - | - | |
Reference: Reference group of categorical variables; ORU: univariate odds ratio; ORA: odds ratio adjusted for other significant factors obtained from backward stepwise logistic regression analysis using variables with p-value < 0.25 in univariate analysis as candidate variables; NS: not statistically significant in multivariate analysis; NE: not entered into multivariable analysis.
Figure 1Factors associated with cervical cancer screening.