| Literature DB >> 35685953 |
Kehinde S Okunade1,2, Sarah John-Olabode3, Adebola A Adejimi4, Yusuf A Oshodi5,6, Benedetto Osunwusi2, Aloy O Ugwu2, Ayodeji Adefemi6, Rose I Anorlu1,2.
Abstract
We assessed the predictors of Pap smear testing uptake within 6 months after cervical cancer prevention education among women in Lagos, Nigeria. This was a prospective follow-up study conducted as part of the 'mHealth-Cervix trial' in the two teaching hospitals in Lagos, Nigeria, between August 2020 and April 2021. Participants were followed up for 6 months after pre-enrolment cervical cancer prevention education. The potential socio-demographic and clinical predictors of Pap smear testing uptake during the 6-month follow-up were tested using the predictive model in a binary logistic regression analysis. Statistical significance was reported as p < 0.05. The rate of Pap smear testing uptake during the 6-month follow-up was 35.7%. Following the adjustments in the final multivariate analysis, participants' previous awareness of Pap smearing (RR = 6.92, 95% CI: 8.37-56.68, p = 0.001) and attendance at the general outpatient clinic during the period of follow-up (RR = 11.22, 95% CI: 1.54-81.51, p = 0.017) independently predict Pap smear testing uptake. We will, therefore, explore the impact of continuous provision of health promotion on cervical cancer prevention and its effect in the context of routine clinical care in our next implementation research agenda. We recommend, in the meantime, that regular health education of women on cervical cancer prevention by healthcare providers should be further reinforced as an integral part of health promotion in clinics to reduce the burden of cervical cancer in most low- and middle-income settings. © the authors; licensee ecancermedicalscience.Entities:
Keywords: Nigeria; Pap smear uptake; cervical cancer; health promotion; mHealth-Cervix
Year: 2022 PMID: 35685953 PMCID: PMC9085162 DOI: 10.3332/ecancer.2022.1368
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecancermedicalscience ISSN: 1754-6605
Baseline characteristics of participants at enrolment (n = 98).
| Characteristic | |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 38.0 ± 10.3 |
| Residential location from the clinic (km) | 15.1 ± 8.5 |
|
| |
| 0 | 15 (15.3) |
| 1-3 | 76 (77.6) |
| >3 | 7 (7.1) |
|
| |
| Premenopause | 77 (78.6) |
| Postmenopause | 21 (21.4) |
|
| |
| Never married | 18 (18.4) |
| Married | 71 (72.4) |
| Divorced | 6 (6.1) |
| Widowed | 3 (3.1) |
|
| |
| No formal education | 7 (7.1) |
| Primary education | 22 (22.4) |
| Secondary education | 41 (41.8) |
| Tertiary education | 28 (28.6) |
|
| |
| Lower | 39 (39.8) |
| Middle | 36 (36.7) |
| Upper | 23 (23.5) |
|
| |
| Yes | 38 (38.8) |
| No | 60 (61.2) |
|
| |
| Yes | 27 (27.6) |
| No | 71 (72.4) |
km, kilometre; Pap, Papanicolaou
Values are given as mean ± SD or number (percentage) unless indicated otherwise
Univariate analyses of socio-demographic and clinical predictors of Pap smear testing uptake after 6 months of follow-up (n = 98)
| Predictors | Estimates of effect on Pap smear testing uptake | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uptake | Non-uptake | Risk ratio (95%CI) | ||
|
| ||||
|
| 14 (35.0) | 26 (65.0) | 1.00 (ref) | - |
|
| 21 (36.2) | 37 (63.8) | 1.05 (0.45–2.46) | 0.902 |
|
| ||||
|
| 17 (32.7) | 35 (67.3) | 1.00 (ref) | - |
|
| 18 (39.1) | 28 (60.9) | 1.32 (0.58–3.03) | 0.507 |
|
| ||||
|
| 8 (53.3) | 7 (46.7) | 1.00 (ref) | - |
| 24 (31.6) | 52 (68.4) | 1.52 (0.25–9.29) | 0.648 | |
|
| 3 (42.9) | 4 (57.1) | 0.62 (0.60–2.97) | 0.545 |
|
| ||||
|
| 28 (36.4) | 49 (63.6) | 1.00 (ref) | - |
|
| 7 (33.3) | 14 (66.7) | 1.09 (0.56–2.14) | 0.797 |
|
| ||||
|
| 7 (38.9) | 11 (61.1) | 1.00 (ref) | - |
|
| 28 (35.0) | 52 (65.0) | 0.85 (0.29–2.43) | 0.756 |
|
| ||||
|
| 2 (28.6) | 5 (71.4) | 1.00 (ref) | - |
|
| 33 (36.3) | 58 (63.7) | 1.42 (0.26–7.74) | 0.684 |
|
| ||||
|
| 6 (15.4) | 33 (84.6) | 1.00 (ref) | - |
|
| 17 (47.2) | 19 (52.8) | 4.92 (1.66–14.61) | 0.004 |
|
| 12 (52.2) | 11 (47.8) | 6.00 (1.81–19.81) | 0.003 |
|
| ||||
|
| 3 (5.0) | 57 (95.0) | 1.00 (ref) | - |
|
| 32 (84.2) | 6 (15.8) | 16.84 (5.54–51.18) | 0.001 |
|
| ||||
|
| 11 (15.5) | 60 (84.5) | 1.00 (ref) | - |
|
| 24 (88.9) | 3 (11.1) | 5.74 (3.28–10.04) | 0.001 |
|
| ||||
|
| 16 (21.6) | 58 (78.4) | 1.00 (ref) | - |
|
| 19 (79.2) | 5 (20.8) | 13.78 (4.45–42.64) | 0.001 |
km, kilometre; GOP, general outpatient; Pap, Papanicolaou
Multivariate analyses of predictors of Pap test uptake after 6 months of follow-up (n = 98)
| Predictors | Estimates of effect on Pap smear testing uptake | |
|---|---|---|
| Risk ratio (95%CI) | ||
|
| ||
|
| 1.00 (ref) | - |
|
| 2.96 (0.36–24.40) | 0.313 |
|
| 2.97 (0.50–17.59) | 0.230 |
|
| ||
|
| 1.00 (ref) | 0.001 |
|
| 6.92 (8.37–56.68) | - |
|
| ||
|
| 1.00 (ref) | - |
|
| 1.43 (0.18–11.30) | 0.737 |
|
| ||
|
| 1.00 (ref) | - |
|
| 11.22 (1.54–81.51) | 0.017 |
GOP, general outpatient; Pap, Papanicolaou