| Literature DB >> 30447104 |
Suzanne Vang1, Laurie R Margolies2, Lina Jandorf3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Although breast cancer deaths have declined, the mortality rate among women from medically underserved communities is disproportionally high. Screening mammography is the most effective tool for detecting breast cancer in its early stages, yet many women from medically underserved communities do not have adequate access to screening mammograms. Mobile mammography may be able to bridge this gap by providing screening mammograms at no cost or low cost and delivering services to women in their own neighborhoods, thus eliminating cost and transportation barriers. The objective of this systematic review was to describe the scope and impact of mobile mammography programs in promoting mammographic screening participation among medically underserved women.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30447104 PMCID: PMC6266518 DOI: 10.5888/pcd15.180291
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prev Chronic Dis ISSN: 1545-1151 Impact factor: 2.830
FigureThe process of including and excluding articles analyzed in a systematic review of mobile mammography among medically underserved women, United States, January 2010–March 2018.
Results of Studies Examining Medically Underserved Women’s Participation in Mobile Mammography, United States, January 2010–March 2018
| Study Location | Underserved Group Targeted and Sample Size | Research Design | Screening Guideline and Recency of Screening | Adherence Rate | Study Purpose | Major Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Chen et al, 2016 ( | ||||||
| Santa Clara County, California: mobile mammography operated by nonprofit community health centers; fixed unit operated by county hospital | Uninsured or underinsured Latina, Asian, or African American women (n = 11). Non-Hispanic white women not included. | Mixed methods: focus groups and a demographic survey | Not reported | Not reported | Examine women’s perceptions of mobile mammography and fixed mammography | Women’s perceptions of mobile mammography: |
| Fayanju et al, 2014 ( | ||||||
| St. Louis and southeastern Missouri: mobile mammography operated by university hospital; fixed unit operated by academic medical center | Low-income African American and Hispanic women; non-Hispanic white women also included (n = 9,082). | Cross-sectional survey: 6-item questionnaire about women’s mammography experience | Not reported | Not reported | Investigate perceived barriers to use of screening mammograms | Three most commonly perceived barriers to screening mammography were |
| Fear of mammogram-related pain was more likely to be reported among | ||||||
| Black (OR, 2.46) and Hispanic (OR, 2.98) women were also more likely to report fear of receiving bad news than were non-Hispanic white women. | ||||||
| Stanley et al, 2017 ( | ||||||
| Charleston, South Carolina, and surrounding areas: mobile mammography unit operated by university hospital; fixed unit operated by academic medical center | Hispanic and African American women; non-Hispanic white and “other” racial/ethnic women also included (n = 1,433 at mobile site; n = 1,434 at fixed site). | Retrospective review of electronic medical records | Past 1 year | Mobile, 34.5%; fixed, 56.9% | Evaluate characteristics of women who use mobile vs fixed mammography | • Mobile site had a higher recall rate than fixed site (16% vs 13%) |
| Vyas et al, 2013 ( | ||||||
| West Virginia: mobile mammography unit operated by university hospital; fixed unit operated by university medical center | Low-income and/or uninsured Appalachian women; Appalachian women from other income groups and insured Appalachian women also included (n = 1,161 at mobile unit; n = 1,104 at fixed unit). | Cross-sectional survey: questionnaire consisting of personal health history, menstrual and pregnancy history, family history of cancer, cancer risk assessment and screening history, views on breast cancer screening, breast cancer awareness, preventive care and wellness history, nutrition and exercise history, dental, smoking and alcohol consumption history, and demographics | Past 2 years | Mobile, 48.2%; fixed, 92.3% | Compare characteristics of women who use mobile unit vs fixed mammography | Women using mobile unit, compared with women using the fixed unit, were |
|
| ||||||
| Brooks et al, 2013 ( | ||||||
| Jefferson County, Kentucky: mobile mammography unit operated by private hospital | Uninsured African American and Hispanic women; non-Hispanic white women also included (n = 3,923). | Retrospective review of electronic medical records | Past 5 years | 29% | Evaluate mammographic screening outcomes and their predictors | Women with abnormal mammograms (BI-RADS category 4,5, or 6) were more likely than women with normal mammograms (BI-RADS category 1, 2, or 3) to be |
| Women with BI-RADS category 0 mammograms were less likely than women with BI-RADS category 1, 2, or 3 to | ||||||
| Drake et al, 2015 ( | ||||||
| St. Louis, Missouri: mobile mammography unit operated by university hospital | African American women; non-Hispanic white women also included (n = 8,450). | Secondary data analysis: mammography outreach registry with data on patient demographics and quality of mammography experience | Not reported | Not reported | Identify factors associated with repeat use of mobile mammography | Repeat visits were more likely to occur among women who were |
| LeMasters et al, 2014 ( | ||||||
| West Virginia: mobile mammography operated by university hospital | Low-income or uninsured Appalachian women; Appalachian women from other income groups and insured Appalachian women also included (n = 1,182). | Cross-sectional survey: questionnaire on demographics, personal health history, menstrual and reproductive history, family history of cancer, breast cancer risk perceptions, breast cancer knowledge, perceived benefits and barriers to mammography, anxiety about developing breast cancer, clinical preventive care, health status, and health behavior/lifestyle | Past 1 year and 2 years | Past 1 year: 11.8%; past 2 years: 48.0% | Describe characteristics of women who responded “don’t know” when asked about their perceived 5-year risk of developing breast cancer | Women who responded “don't know” to their perceived 5-year breast cancer risk, compared with women who made an accurate or inaccurate response, |
| Mizuguchi et al, 2015 ( | ||||||
| Jefferson County, Kentucky, and surrounding areas: mobile mammography operated by university hospital | Uninsured African American or Hispanic women; non-Hispanic white women and “other” racial/ethnic group also included (n = 21,857). | Retrospective chart review: electronic medical records and data from patient information history form | Not reported | Not reported | Assess repeat use of mobile mammography | • Most (54%) patients used mobile mammography only once. |
| Roen et al, 2013 ( | ||||||
| Reservations in North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Iowa: mobile mammography operated by Indian Health Service | American Indian women only (n = 1,771). | Retrospective chart review of mammogram records | Past 2 years | 40% | Determine adherence to screening mammography | • Women aged 41–49 were less likely (OR, 0.65) to have been adherent to screening mammogram guidelines compared with women aged 65 or older. |
| Vyas et al, 2012 ( | ||||||
| West Virginia: mobile mammography operated by university hospital | Low-income, uninsured Appalachian women; Appalachian women from other income groups and insured Appalachian women also included (n = 686). | Cross-sectional survey: questionnaire on personal health history, menstrual and pregnancy history, family history of cancer, cancer risk assessment and screening history, views on breast cancer screening, breast cancer awareness, preventive care and wellness history, nutrition and exercise history, dental, smoking and alcohol consumption history, and demographics | Past 2 years | 46% | Identify predictors of adherence in women who use mobile mammography | Women who were adherent were more likely to |
Abbreviations: BI-RADS, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System; OR, odds ratio.