| Literature DB >> 34740352 |
Monica Ewomazino Akokuwebe1, Erhabor Sunday Idemudia2, Abiel M Lekulo2, Ogone Warona Motlogeloa2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer (CC) is the cancer with the most incidents and the leading cause of cancer mortality among women in South Africa. CC screening is one of the most cost-effective control approaches for the disease burden. This study assessed the determinants and individual-level indicators of cervical cancer screening uptake among women of reproductive age in South Africa.Entities:
Keywords: Cervical cancer; Determinants; Levels; Reproductive age; Screening; South Africa; Women
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34740352 PMCID: PMC8571865 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-021-12020-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Distribution of Population by Socio-Demographic Characteristics, South Africa
| Socio Demographic Characteristics | Frequency | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 100 | |||
| Ever had Pap Smear | Yes | 3805 | 35.5 |
| No | 2098 | 64.4 | |
| Age Group | 15–24 | 1394 | 23.6 |
| 25–34 | 1268 | 21.5 | |
| 35–44 | 937 | 15.9 | |
| 45+ | 2304 | 39.0 | |
| Population Group | African/Black | 5010 | 84.9 |
| White | 251 | 4.3 | |
| Coloured | 566 | 9.6 | |
| Indian/Asian | 76 | 1.3 | |
| Province | Western Cape | 445 | 7.5 |
| Eastern Cape | 779 | 13.2 | |
| Northern Cape | 495 | 8.4 | |
| Free State | 637 | 10.8 | |
| KwaZulu-Natal | 941 | 15.9 | |
| North West | 561 | 9.5 | |
| Gauteng | 547 | 9.3 | |
| Mpumalanga | 666 | 11.3 | |
| Limpopo | 832 | 14.1 | |
| Geographical Type | Rural | 2683 | 45.5 |
| Urban | 3220 | 54.6 | |
| Educational Attainment | No education | 569 | 9.6 |
| Primary | 1018 | 17.3 | |
| Secondary | 3776 | 64.0 | |
| Higher | 540 | 9.2 | |
| Occupation | Not working | 4127 | 69.9 |
| Professional/Formal | 1020 | 17.3 | |
| Non-professional/Informal | 756 | 12.8 | |
| Marital Status | Never Married | 3667 | 62.1 |
| Married | 1461 | 24.8 | |
| Divorced | 113 | 1.9 | |
| Widowed | 662 | 11.2 | |
| Wealth Index | Poor | 2430 | 41.2 |
| Middle | 1317 | 22.3 | |
| Rich | 2156 | 36.5 | |
| Health Insurance Cover | Yes | 796 | 13.5 |
| No | 5107 | 86.5 | |
| Perceived Health Status | Poor | 766 | 13.0 |
| Average | 1980 | 33.5 | |
| Good | 2384 | 40.4 | |
| Excellent | 773 | 13.1 | |
Source: SADHS, 2016
Population Characteristics by Pap Smear Testing among Females Aged 15–49 Years in South Africa
| Ever had a Pap Smear | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15–24 | 1291 | 92.6 | 103 | 7.4 | 1394 |
| 25–34 | 839 | 66.2 | 429 | 33.8 | 1268 |
| 35–44 | 445 | 47.5 | 492 | 52.5 | 937 |
| 45+ | 1230 | 53.4 | 1074 | 46.6 | 2304 |
| African/Black | 3442 | 68.7 | 1568 | 31.3 | 5010 |
| White | 59 | 23.5 | 192 | 76.5 | 251 |
| Coloured | 273 | 48.2 | 293 | 51.8 | 566 |
| Indian/Asian | 31 | 40.8 | 45 | 59.2 | 76 |
| Urban | 1828 | 56.7 | 1392 | 43.2 | 3220 |
| Rural | 1977 | 73.7 | 706 | 26.3 | 2683 |
| No education | 434 | 76.3 | 135 | 23.7 | 569 |
| Primary | 665 | 65.3 | 353 | 34.7 | 1018 |
| Secondary | 2483 | 65.8 | 1293 | 34.2 | 3776 |
| Higher | 223 | 42.3 | 317 | 68.7 | 540 |
| Not working | 2903 | 70.3 | 1224 | 29.7 | 4127 |
| Professional/Formal | 462 | 45.3 | 558 | 54.7 | 1020 |
| Non-professional/Informal | 440 | 58.2 | 316 | 41.8 | 756 |
| Never Married | 2649 | 72.2 | 1018 | 27.8 | 3667 |
| Married | 706 | 48.3 | 755 | 51.7 | 1461 |
| Divorced | 32 | 28.3 | 81 | 71.7 | 113 |
| Widowed | 418 | 63.1 | 244 | 36.9 | 662 |
| Poor | 1829 | 75.7 | 591 | 24.3 | 2430 |
| Middle | 891 | 67.7 | 426 | 32.4 | 1317 |
| Rich | 1075 | 49.9 | 1081 | 50.1 | 2156 |
| No | 3489 | 68.3 | 1618 | 31.7 | 5107 |
| Yes | 316 | 39.7 | 480 | 60.3 | 796 |
Source: SADHS, 2016
Fig. 1Graph showing proportion of women of reproductive age who have ever had a Pap smear, by province
Fig. 2Graph depicting perceived health status of women aged 15–49 years who have ever had a Pap smear
Logistic Regression Showing Odds Estimates of Pap Smear Testing amongst Women aged 15–49 years by Population Characteristics in South Africa
| Population Characteristic | Ever had Pap Smear, | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model I: Unadjusted AOR | Model II: Adjusted AOR | |||||||
| OR | p > Z | [95% Conf. Interval] | OR | p > Z | [95% Conf. Interval] | |||
| 15–24 | ||||||||
| 25–34 | 5.61 | 0.000 | 4.3862 | 7.17 | 6.09 | 0.000 | 4.78 | 7.76 |
| 35–44 | 12.14 | 0.000 | 9.3698 | 15.73 | 13.62 | 0.000 | 10.57 | 17.55 |
| 45+ | 11.95 | 0.000 | 9.2343 | 15.47 | 13.06 | 0.000 | 10.12 | 16.85 |
| African/Black | ||||||||
| White | 2.21 | 0.000 | 1.54 | 3.16 | 2.48 | 0.000 | 1.75 | 3.51 |
| Coloured | 1.05 | 0.697 | 0.81 | 1.37 | 1.07 | 0.697 | 0.82 | 1.39 |
| Indian/Asian | 1.56 | 0.107 | 0.91 | 2.68 | 1.63 | 0.107 | 0.95 | 2.80 |
| Western Cape | ||||||||
| Eastern Cape | 0.40 | 0.000 | 0.29 | 0.55 | 0.40 | 0.000 | 0.29 | 0.55 |
| Northern Cape | 0.38 | 0.000 | 0.28 | 0.52 | 0.37 | 0.000 | 0.27 | 0.50 |
| Free State | 0.33 | 0.000 | 0.24 | 0.47 | 0.33 | 0.000 | 0.23 | 0.45 |
| KwaZulu-Natal | 0.31 | 0.000 | 0.22 | 0.43 | 0.30 | 0.000 | 0.22 | 0.42 |
| North West | 0.46 | 0.000 | 0.33 | 0.64 | 0.46 | 0.000 | 0.33 | 0.64 |
| Gauteng | 0.24 | 0.000 | 0.17 | 0.34 | 0.24 | 0.000 | 0.17 | 0.34 |
| Mpumalanga | 0.41 | 0.000 | 0.29 | 0.57 | 0.41 | 0.000 | 0.29 | 0.57 |
| Limpopo | 0.31 | 0.000 | 0.22 | 0.43 | 0.31 | 0.000 | 0.22 | 0.43 |
| Urban | ||||||||
| Rural | 0.73 | 0.000 | 0.62 | 0.86 | 0.72 | 0.000 | 0.61 | 0.86 |
| No education | ||||||||
| Primary | 1.86 | 0.000 | 1.46 | 2.38 | 1.88 | 0.000 | 1.47 | 2.40 |
| Secondary | 2.72 | 0.000 | 2.14 | 3.47 | 2.92 | 0.000 | 2.30 | 3.71 |
| Higher | 4.45 | 0.000 | 3.20 | 6.19 | 5.61 | 0.000 | 4.09 | 7.70 |
| Never Married | ||||||||
| Married | 1.31 | 0.000 | 1.13 | 1.53 | 1.33 | 0.000 | 1.14 | 1.54 |
| Divorced | 2.53 | 0.000 | 1.60 | 4.02 | 2.58 | 0.000 | 1.63 | 4.09 |
| Widowed | 0.90 | 0.342 | 0.73 | 1.12 | 0.89 | 0.342 | 0.72 | 1.09 |
| No | ||||||||
| Yes | 1.37 | 0.003 | 1.11 | 1.69 | ||||
| Poor | ||||||||
| Middle | 1.12 | 0.192 | 0.94 | 1.33 | 1.14 | 0.192 | 0.96 | 1.35 |
| Rich | 1.38 | 0.001 | 1.14 | 1.67 | 1.47 | 0.001 | 1.22 | 1.77 |
| Not working | ||||||||
| Professional/Formal | 1.38 | 0.000 | 1.16 | 1.65 | ||||
| Non-professional/Informal | 1.24 | 0.016 | 1.04 | 1.48 | ||||
| Poor | ||||||||
| Average | 0.80 | 0.025 | 0.66 | 0.97 | 0.82 | 0.025 | 0.68 | 0.99 |
| Good | 0.81 | 0.040 | 0.67 | 0.99 | 0.84 | 0.040 | 0.69 | 1.03 |
| Excellent | 0.67 | 0.003 | 0.51 | 0.88 | 0.71 | 0.003 | 0.55 | 0.92 |
Source: SADHS, 2016; RC – Reference category