Literature DB >> 8303003

A nurse-delivered intervention to reduce barriers to breast and cervical cancer screening in Chicago inner city clinics.

D Ansell1, L Lacey, S Whitman, E Chen, C Phillips.   

Abstract

An 18-month intervention was implemented to increase breast and cervical cancer screening among poor African-American women in Chicago. Breast and cervical cancer screening programs were set up in two public clinics, one community-based and the other hospital-based. Nurse clinicians and public health workers were used in these programs to recruit women in the clinics and in targeted community institutions to receive free breast and cervical cancer screening. The following barriers were specifically addressed by the intervention: accessibility of screening, knowledge about breast and cervical cancers, access to followup screening examinations, and access to treatment. A computerized followup system was specifically designed to track patients. During the 18 months of the intervention, 10,829 visits were made by 7,654 low-income women. A total of 84 cases of breast cancer and 9 cases of cervical cancer were detected. Awareness of the program, as measured by a survey after the completion of the intervention, increased in both clinics compared with baseline results. Knowledge about breast and cervical cancers also increased, as measured by scores on tests given before and after a class on breast and cervical cancers. Followup rates were 86 percent for women attending the programs. More than 90 percent of the women referred for evaluation of breast abnormalities kept an appointment. In summary, the intervention was successful in reducing barriers to breast and cervical cancer detection and in attracting a high-risk group of women.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8303003      PMCID: PMC1402249     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Public Health Rep        ISSN: 0033-3549            Impact factor:   2.792


  21 in total

1.  Factors associated with repeat adherence to breast cancer screening.

Authors:  C Lerman; B Rimer; B Trock; A Balshem; P F Engstrom
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 4.018

2.  Periodic breast cancer screening in reducing mortality from breast cancer.

Authors:  S Shapiro; P Strax; L Venet
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1971-03-15       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Sensitivity and specificity of first screen mammography in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: a preliminary report from five centers.

Authors:  C J Baines; A B Miller; C Wall; D V McFarlane; I S Simor; R Jong; B J Shapiro; L Audet; M Petitclerc; D Ouimet-Oliva
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1986-08       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project: five-year summary report.

Authors:  L H Baker
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  1982 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 508.702

5.  Individual and combined effectiveness of palpation, thermography, and mammography in breast cancer screening.

Authors:  J K Gohagan; N D Rodes; C W Blackwell; W P Darby; C Farrell; T Herder; D K Pearson; E L Spitznagel; M D Wallace
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  1980-11       Impact factor: 4.018

6.  Repeated screening for breast cancer.

Authors:  J Chamberlain; R E Clifford; B E Nathan; J L Price; I Burn
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1984-03       Impact factor: 3.710

7.  Dropouts and broken appointments. A literature review and agenda for future research.

Authors:  R A Deyo; T S Inui
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1980-11       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Hospital work load produced by breast-cancer screening programme run by trained non-medical staff.

Authors:  W D George; R A Sellwood; D A Asbury; G Hartley
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1980-09-06

9.  The severity of breast cancer at diagnosis: a comparison of age and extent of disease in black and white women.

Authors:  W A Satariano; S H Belle; G M Swanson
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1986-07       Impact factor: 9.308

10.  Breast cancer detection.

Authors:  T Carlile
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1981-03-01       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Interventions to promote adherence with oral agents.

Authors:  Susan M Schneider; Kimberly Hess; Tracy Gosselin
Journal:  Semin Oncol Nurs       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 2.315

2.  Predicting patterns of mammography use: a geographic perspective on national needs for intervention research.

Authors:  Julie Legler; Nancy Breen; Helen Meissner; Don Malec; Cathy Coyne
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Canadian cancer screening disparities: a recent historical perspective.

Authors:  J Kerner; J Liu; K Wang; S Fung; C Landry; G Lockwood; L Zitzelsberger; V Mai
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.677

4.  Efficacy of patient letter reminders on cervical cancer screening: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  D S Tseng; E Cox; M B Plane; K M Hla
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  A two-center study of Muslim women's views of breast cancer and breast health practices in Pakistan and the UK.

Authors:  Maggie Banning; Haroon Hafeez
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2010-02-10       Impact factor: 2.037

6.  Increasing breast and cervical cancer screening in low-income women.

Authors:  K L Margolis; N Lurie; P G McGovern; M Tyrrell; J S Slater
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Do cervical cancer screening rates increase in association with an intervention designed to increase mammography usage?

Authors:  Mira L Katz; Cathy M Tatum; Cecilia R Degraffinreid; Stephanie Dickinson; Electra D Paskett
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2007 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.681

8.  Revisiting the effect of the Pap test on cervical cancer.

Authors:  N D Holmquist
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 9.308

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.