Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
52
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    5
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Breast and bowel cancer screening uptake patterns over 15 years for UK south Asian ethnic minority populations, corrected for differences in socio-demographic characteristics

      research-article
      1 , , 1 , 1
      BMC Public Health
      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          A number of studies have reported low uptake of cancer screening programmes by South Asian populations in the UK. However, studies to date have not adjusted findings for differences in demographics and socio-economic status of these populations.

          Methods

          Subjects: All residents in Coventry and Warwickshire, UK, eligible for screening. Uptakes compared for round 1 (2000–02) and round 2 (2003–05) of a national bowel cancer screening pilot, and for rounds 1, 2 and 5 of the established NHS breast cancer screening programme (commenced 1989).

          Data: Bowel screening data were analysed for 123,367 invitees in round 1 and 116,773 in round 2 (total 240,140 cases). Breast screening data were analysed for 61,934, 62,829 and 86,749 invitees in rounds 1, 2 and 5 respectively (total 211,512 cases).

          Analysis: Screening uptake was compared for two broad meta-categories (South Asian and non-Asian) and for five Asian subgroups (Hindu-Gujarati; Hindu-Other; Muslim; Sikh; South Asian Other). Univariate and multivariate analyses examined screening uptake and various demographic attributes of invitees, including age, gender, deprivation and ethnic group.

          Results

          South Asians demonstrated significantly lower ( p < 0.001) unadjusted bowel screening uptake; 32.8% vs. 61.3% for non-Asians (round 1). Rates were particularly low for the Muslim subgroup: 26.1% (round 1), 21.5% (round 2). For breast screening, a smaller difference was observed between South Asians and non-Asians; initially 60.8% vs. 75.4% (round 1) and later 66.8% vs. 77.7% (round 5). Thus, the disparity reduced gradually over time, alongside an overall trend of increased uptake. However, figures remained consistently low for Muslims (51% in rounds 1 and 5). After adjusting for age, deprivation (and gender), bowel screening uptake remained significantly lower for all South Asian subgroups. After similar adjustments, breast screening uptake remained lower for all subgroups except Hindu-Gujaratis.

          For Muslims registered with an Asian (vs. non-Asian) GP, bowel screening uptake was significantly lower ( p < 0.001). However, breast screening uptake for Muslims with an Asian (vs. non-Asian) GP showed no difference ( p = 0.12) in the same period.

          Colonoscopy and breast assessment uptakes were similar for both meta-categories, but Asian response time appeared slower for colonoscopy. The percentage of abnormal FOBT results was significantly higher for South Asian invitees. A slight increase in abnormal mammograms was observed for Muslims over time (2.7% to 4.2% in rounds 1 and 5 respectively).

          Conclusion

          The lower cancer screening uptakes observed for the South Asian population cannot be attributed to socio-economic, age or gender population differences. Although breast screening disparities have reduced over time, significant differences remain. We conclude that both programmes need to implement and assess interventions to reduce such differences.

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Effects of race and income on mortality and use of services among Medicare beneficiaries.

          There are wide disparities between blacks and whites in the use of many Medicare services. We studied the effects of race and income on mortality and use of services. We linked 1990 census data on median income according to ZIP Code with 1993 Medicare administrative data for 26.3 million beneficiaries 65 years of age or older (24.2 million whites and 2.1 million blacks). We calculated age-adjusted mortality rates and age- and sex-adjusted rates of various diagnoses and procedures according to race and income and computed black:white ratios. The 1993 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey was used to validate the results and determine rates of immunization against influenza. For mortality, the black:white ratios were 1.19 for men and 1.16 for women (P<0.001 for both). For hospital discharges, the ratio was 1.14 (P<0.001), and for visits to physicians for ambulatory care it was 0.89 (P<0.001). For every 100 women, there were 26.0 mammograms among whites and 17.1 mammograms among blacks. As compared with mammography rates in the respective most affluent group, rates in the least affluent group were 33 percent lower among whites and 22 percent lower among blacks. The black:white rate ratio was 2.45 for bilateral orchiectomy and 3.64 for amputations of all or part of the lower limb (P<0.001 for both). For every 1000 beneficiaries, there were 515 influenza immunizations among whites and 313 among blacks. As compared with immunization rates in the respective most affluent group, rates in the least affluent group were 26 percent lower among whites and 39 percent lower among blacks. Adjusting the mortality and utilization rates for differences in income generally reduced the racial differences, but the effect was relatively small. Race and income have substantial effects on mortality and use of services among Medicare beneficiaries. Providing health insurance is not enough to ensure that the program is used effectively and equitably by all beneficiaries.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Participation in colorectal cancer screening: a review.

            The purpose of this review is to evaluate the published literature on adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) and sigmoidoscopy. Specifically, the review addresses the following: 1) prevalence of FOBT and sigmoidoscopy; 2) interventions to increase adherence to FOBT and sigmoidoscopy; 3) correlates or predictors of adherence to FOBT and sigmoidoscopy; and 4) reasons for nonadherence. Other objectives are to put the literature on CRC screening adherence in the context of recently reported findings from experimental interventions to change prevention and early detection behaviors and to suggest directions for future research on CRC screening adherence. CRC screening offers the potential both for primary and for secondary prevention. Data from the 1992 National Health Interview Survey show that 26% of the population more than 49 years of age report FOBT within the past 3 years and 33% report ever having had sigmoidoscopy. The Year 2000 goals set forth in Healthy People 2000 are for 50% of the population more than 49 years of age to report FOBT within the past 2 years and for 40% to report that they ever had sigmoidoscopy. Thus, systematic efforts to increase CRC screening are warranted. To date, attempts to promote CRC screening have used both a public health model that targets entire communities, e.g., mass media campaigns, and a medical model that targets individuals, e.g., general practice patients. Most of these efforts, however, did not include systematic evaluation of strategies to increase adherence. The data on FOBT show that the median adherence rate to programmatic offers of FOBT is between 40% and 50%, depending on the type of population offered the test, e.g., patients or employees. Approximately, 50% of those initially offered testing in unselected populations will respond to minimal prompts or interventions. A salient issue for FOBT, however, is whether or not the behavior can be sustained over time. Fewer studies examined adherence to sigmoidoscopy. Adherence was highest in relatives of CRC cases and in employer-sponsored programs offered to workers at increased risk of CRC. At present, we know very little about the determinants of CRC screening behaviors, particularly as they relate to rescreening.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Prospective study of predictors of attendance for breast screening in inner London.

              To investigate the predictors of first-round attendance for breast screening in an inner city area. Prospective design in which women were interviewed or completed a postal questionnaire before being sent their invitation for breast screening. Sociodemographic factors, health behaviours, and attitudes, beliefs, and intentions were used as predictors of subsequent attendance. A randomised control group was included to assess the effect of being interviewed on attendance. Three neighbouring health districts in inner south east London. A total of 3291 women aged 50-64 years who were due to be called for breast screening for the first time. The analysis of predictors was based on a subsample of 1301, reflecting a response rate of 75% to interview and 36% to postal questionnaire. Attendance was 42% overall, and 70% in those who gave an interview or returned a questionnaire. There was little evidence for an interview effect on attendance. The main findings from the analysis of predictors are listed below. (These were necessarily based on those women who responded to interview/questionnaire and so may not be generalisable to the full sample.) (1) Sociodemographic factors: Women in rented accommodation were less likely to go for screening but other indicators of social class and education were not predictive of attendance. Age and other risk factors for breast cancer were unrelated to attendance, as was the distance between home and the screening centre. Married or single women were more likely to attend than divorced, separated, or widowed women, and black women had a higher than average attendance rate; however, neither of these relationships was found in the interview sample. (2) Health behaviours: Attenders were less likely to have had a recent breast screen, more likely to have had a cervical smear, more likely to go to the dentist for check ups, and differed from non-attenders with regard to drinking frequency. Exercise, smoking, diet change, and breast self-examination were unrelated to attendance. (3) Attitudes, beliefs, and intentions: The two best predictors were measures of the perceived importance of regular screening for cervical and breast cancer and intentions to go for breast screening. Also predictive were beliefs about the following: the personal consequences of going for breast screening, the effectiveness of breast screening, the chances of getting breast cancer, and the attitudes of significant others (the woman's husband/partner and children). Women who reported a moderate amount of worry about breast cancer were more likely to attend than those at the two extremes. Attenders and non-attenders differ in two broad areas: the health related behaviours they engage in and the attitudes, beliefs, and intentions they have towards breast cancer and breast screening. The latter are potentially amenable to change, and though different factors may operate among women who do not respond to questionnaires, the findings offer hope that attendance rates can be improved by targeting the relevant attitudes and beliefs. This could be done by changing the invitation letter and its accompanying literature, through national and local publicity campaigns, and by advice given by GPs, practice nurses, and other health professionals. It is essential that such interventions are properly evaluated, preferably in randomised controlled studies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BioMed Central
                1471-2458
                2008
                2 October 2008
                : 8
                : 346
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Clinical Sciences Institute, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
                Article
                1471-2458-8-346
                10.1186/1471-2458-8-346
                2575216
                18831751
                b5b0bc9c-e2a3-4f04-940a-4d7d59b75d48
                Copyright © 2008 Szczepura et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 19 February 2008
                : 2 October 2008
                Categories
                Research Article

                Public health
                Public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content104

                Cited by55

                Most referenced authors693