Search

Objective: To know the reasons to participate or not in a colorectal cancer (CCR) screening programme and to analyze the differences by sex, age and social class., Methods: Cross-sectional study by a telephone survey directed to a sample of men and women aged between 50-74 year old,participants (n = 383) and non participants (n = 383) in the CCR screening programme of Valencian Community. Descriptive analysis and logistic regression models estimating the Odds Ratio (p < 0.05)., Results: The main reasons to participate are "it is important for health" (97.9 %) and "the test is easy" (97.6 %); and to nonparticipate are "no CCR symptoms" (49.7 %) and "didn't receive invitation letter" (48.3 %). Women are more likely not to participate if the reason was to consider the "test unpleasant" (OR: 1.82; IC: 1.00-3.28), and men if the reason was "lack of time" (OR 0.51;IC: 0.27-0.97); persons 60 or more years old if the reason was "diagnostic fear" (OR: 2.31; IC: 1.11-4.80), and persons 50-59 years old if was "lack of time" (OR 0.44; IC: 0.23-0.85); non manual social class persons if the reason was "lack of time" (OR: 2.66; IC: 1.40-5.10); manual women if the reason was "embarrassment to perform the test" (OR: 0.37; IC: 0.14-0.97); and non manual men if was "lack of time" (OR: 4.78; IC: 1.96-11.66)., Conclusions: There are inequalities in the reasons for not participating in CCR screening programmes by sex, age and social class. It would be advisable to design actions that incorporate specific social group needs in order to reduce inequalities in participation.

Objective: To estimate the cumulative risk of a false-positive screening result in European mammographic screening programmes, and examine the rates and procedures of further assessment., Methods: A literature review was conducted to identify studies of the cumulative risk of a false-positive result in European screening programmes (390,000 women). We then examined aggregate data, cross-sectional information about further assessment procedures among women with positive results in 20 mammographic screening programmes from 17 countries (1.7 million initial screens, 5.9 million subsequent screens), collected by the European Network for Information on Cancer project (EUNICE)., Results: The estimated cumulative risk of a false-positive screening result in women aged 50-69 undergoing 10 biennial screening tests varied from 8% to 21% in the three studies examined (pooled estimate 19.7%). The cumulative risk of an invasive procedure with benign outcome ranged from 1.8% to 6.3% (pooled estimate 2.9%). The risk of undergoing surgical intervention with benign outcome was 0.9% (one study only). From the EUNICE project, the proportions of all screening examinations in the programmes resulting in needle biopsy were 2.2% and 1.1% for initial and subsequent screens, respectively, though the rates differed between countries; the corresponding rates of surgical interventions among women without breast cancer were 0.19% and 0.07%., Conclusion: The specific investigative procedures following a recall should be considered when examining the cumulative risk of a false-positive screening result. Most women with a positive screening test undergo a non-invasive assessment procedure. Only a small proportion of recalled women undergo needle biopsy, and even fewer undergo surgical intervention.

This paper examines the influence of gender and socio-economic status (SES) on participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Qualitative study with eight focus groups comprised of participants and non-participants in a CRC screening programme in Valencia (Spain), structural sample design and discursive analysis by gender, SES and participation. Non-participants and those with lower SES tended to have less knowledge about both the disease and the programme. Reasons for participation varied according to gender: women were motivated because they value the importance of self-care and early detection in order to prevent personal and family suffering while men were encouraged by their partners. Reasons for non-participation were also influenced by gender: women feared the results and considered the test unpleasant whereas men showed carelessness and lack of concern. In population-based programmes, people with lower SES and men are those with the most obstacles to participation due to low health literacy and traditional gender roles respectively. To increase participation in CRC screening programmes based on informed decision making and taking into account social inequalities, information should be more accessible, comprehensible and adapted to gender and SES differences and emphasise the greater vulnerability of men for CRC and the benefits of early detection., (© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Objectives: To determine the factors associated with satisfaction with waiting times for further investigation in breast cancer screening., Methods: We carried out a cross-sectional study by telephone survey of a representative sample of women (N=316) participating in the breast cancer screening program of the autonomous region of Valencia (Spain) who required additional tests to confirm the diagnosis. Descriptive analysis was performed by contingency tables (p<0.05) and multivariate association by odds ratios (OR) of logistic regression models (95%CI)., Results: Satisfaction with the waiting time was 78.6%. A higher risk of dissatisfaction was found in women from a "high" social class (OR=3.17; 95% CI: 1.10-9.14), those who perceived that the waiting time was "more than 2 weeks", both "since the notification of the need for further investigation until completion of the first test" (OR=15,54; 95%CI: 5,87-41,12) and "since the completion of the last test until notification of the final result" (OR=11.57; 95% CI: 2.96-45.19), and in women who experienced the attention as "worse than expected" (OR=15.40; 95% CI: 1.41-168.64). The maximum waiting time acceptable to the highest percentage of women was "up to 1 week" for each waiting period (n=47, 73.5%; n=14, 45.2%)., Conclusions: Waiting times of no more than 1 week and never more than 2 weeks for each waiting period are recommended. Women should be given an approximate waiting time, paying special attention to women aged 45 to 54 years attending their initial screening., (2010 SESPAS. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.)