Literature DB >> 8475011

Impact of a breast cancer screening community intervention.

J G Zapka1, M E Costanza, D R Harris, D Hosmer, A Stoddard, R Barth, V Gaw.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Efforts to detect breast cancer in its early stages are necessary to reduce breast cancer-associated mortality. This study evaluated the impact of a multicomponent intervention implemented between 1987 and 1990 to increase a community's utilization of breast cancer screening by women over 50 years of age.
METHODS: The study used a pretest/post-test two-community design, with one community assigned as the intervention community and the other as the comparison. The intervention consisted of a comprehensive physician involvement component and a community education effort. To assess the overall impact of the interventions, we measured women's participation in screening via random digit dial telephone surveys at three time points, each approximately 18 months apart.
RESULTS: Over the course of the study, there were dramatic improvements in breast cancer screening participation in both communities. However, the intervention city showed more improvement in selected variables than did the comparison community in the early phases of the project between baseline and midpoint. These included increased advice by physicians to have mammograms, increased awareness that screening is necessary in the absence of symptoms, increased awareness that many women over 50 have mammograms, decreased perception of barriers to clinical breast exam, and an increase in the proportion of women having a clinical breast exam. In addition, significantly fewer women in the intervention city than in the comparison city reported never having had a mammogram at midpoint.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrate limited impact of a community intervention during a period of increasing adoption of mammography screening, in part, due to this rapidly rising secular trend. Additionally, increased activities in the comparison community were documented. Therefore, as incidence of screening increases, targeted activities aimed at population subgroups are warranted, and evaluation designs need to include multiple comparison groups or broader geographic random samples.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8475011     DOI: 10.1006/pmed.1993.1003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  8 in total

1.  The effect of Medicare reimbursement for screening mammography on utilization and payment. National Cancer Institute Breast Cancer Screening Consortium.

Authors:  N Breen; E J Feuer; S Depuy; J Zapka
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  1997 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.792

2.  Screening mammography and constructs from the transtheoretical model: Associations using two definitions of the stages-of-adoption.

Authors:  W Rakowski; B Ehrich; C E Dubé; D N Pearlman; M G Goldstein; K K Peterson; B K Rimer; H Woolverton
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  1996-06

3.  Formative research for a community-based message-framing intervention.

Authors:  Josefa L Martinez; Amy E Latimer; Susan E Rivers; Peter Salovey
Journal:  Am J Health Behav       Date:  2012-03

4.  Long-term results from a randomized controlled trial to increase cancer screening among attendees of community health centers.

Authors:  Richard G Roetzheim; Lisa K Christman; Paul B Jacobsen; Jennifer Schroeder; Rania Abdulla; Seft Hunter
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2005 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.166

5.  The role of physician involvement in Latinas' mammography screening adherence.

Authors:  Patricia González; Evelinn A Borrayo
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2011-01-13

6.  Promoting breast and cervical cancer screening at the workplace: results from the Woman to Woman Study.

Authors:  J D Allen; A M Stoddard; J Mays; G Sorensen
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  The African American Women and Mass Media (AAMM) campaign in Georgia: quantifying community response to a CDC pilot campaign.

Authors:  Ingrid J Hall; Ashani Johnson-Turbes; Zahava Berkowitz; Yasmine Zavahir
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2015-03-03       Impact factor: 2.506

8.  Factors determining compliance with screening mammography.

Authors:  M D Beaulieu; F Béland; D Roy; M Falardeau; G Hébert
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1996-05-01       Impact factor: 8.262

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.