Cervical cancer risk and screening among women seeking assistance with basic needs.


Journal

American journal of obstetrics and gynecology
ISSN: 1097-6868
Titre abrégé: Am J Obstet Gynecol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0370476

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 2021
Historique:
received: 15 09 2020
revised: 18 11 2020
accepted: 02 12 2020
pubmed: 15 12 2020
medline: 7 4 2021
entrez: 14 12 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

In the United States, more than half of cervical cancers occur in women who are inadequately screened. Interventions to improve access to cervical cancer preventive care is critical to reduce health inequities. This study aimed to evaluate the need for cervical cancer screening among women seeking assistance with basic needs and to assess best approaches to facilitate Papanicolaou test referral. This study is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of low-income female callers to 2-1-1 Missouri, a helpline for local health and social services. The need for cervical cancer screening was assessed. Callers were randomized to 1 of 3 arms, each providing a Papanicolaou test referral: verbal referral only, verbal referral and tailored print reminder, or verbal referral and navigator. The primary outcome was contacting a Papanicolaou test referral 1 month following intervention. Student t tests or Mann-Whitney U tests were used to analyze significant differences in continuous variables, whereas Fisher exact or χ Among 932 female callers, 250 (26.8%) needed cervical cancer screening. The frequency of unmet basic needs was high, the most common being lack of money for unexpected expenses (91.2%) and necessities, such as food, shelter, and clothing (73.2%). Among those needing a Papanicolaou test, 211 women received screening referrals. Women in the navigator group (21 of 71, 29.6%) reported higher rates of contacting a Papanicolaou test referral than those exposed to verbal referral only (11/73, 15.1%) or verbal referral and tailored print reminder (9/67, 13.4%) (P=.03). Among 176 women with ≥2 unmet needs who received a Papanicolaou test referral, the provision of a navigator remained associated with contacting the referral (navigator [33.9%] vs verbal referral [17.2%] vs tailored reminder [10.2%]; P=.005). Assignment to the navigator group (adjusted odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-8.5) and nonwhite race (adjusted odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-2.8) were independent predictors of contacting a Papanicolaou test referral. Low-income women seeking assistance with basic needs often lack cervical cancer screening. Health navigators triple the likelihood that women will make contact with Papanicolaou test services, but most 2-1-1 callers still fail to schedule Papanicolaou testing despite assistance from navigators. Interventions beyond health navigators are needed to reduce cervical cancer disparities.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
In the United States, more than half of cervical cancers occur in women who are inadequately screened. Interventions to improve access to cervical cancer preventive care is critical to reduce health inequities.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to evaluate the need for cervical cancer screening among women seeking assistance with basic needs and to assess best approaches to facilitate Papanicolaou test referral.
STUDY DESIGN
This study is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of low-income female callers to 2-1-1 Missouri, a helpline for local health and social services. The need for cervical cancer screening was assessed. Callers were randomized to 1 of 3 arms, each providing a Papanicolaou test referral: verbal referral only, verbal referral and tailored print reminder, or verbal referral and navigator. The primary outcome was contacting a Papanicolaou test referral 1 month following intervention. Student t tests or Mann-Whitney U tests were used to analyze significant differences in continuous variables, whereas Fisher exact or χ
RESULTS
Among 932 female callers, 250 (26.8%) needed cervical cancer screening. The frequency of unmet basic needs was high, the most common being lack of money for unexpected expenses (91.2%) and necessities, such as food, shelter, and clothing (73.2%). Among those needing a Papanicolaou test, 211 women received screening referrals. Women in the navigator group (21 of 71, 29.6%) reported higher rates of contacting a Papanicolaou test referral than those exposed to verbal referral only (11/73, 15.1%) or verbal referral and tailored print reminder (9/67, 13.4%) (P=.03). Among 176 women with ≥2 unmet needs who received a Papanicolaou test referral, the provision of a navigator remained associated with contacting the referral (navigator [33.9%] vs verbal referral [17.2%] vs tailored reminder [10.2%]; P=.005). Assignment to the navigator group (adjusted odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-8.5) and nonwhite race (adjusted odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-2.8) were independent predictors of contacting a Papanicolaou test referral.
CONCLUSION
Low-income women seeking assistance with basic needs often lack cervical cancer screening. Health navigators triple the likelihood that women will make contact with Papanicolaou test services, but most 2-1-1 callers still fail to schedule Papanicolaou testing despite assistance from navigators. Interventions beyond health navigators are needed to reduce cervical cancer disparities.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33316278
pii: S0002-9378(20)31393-4
doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.12.018
pmc: PMC8140608
mid: NIHMS1699634
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Randomized Controlled Trial Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

368.e1-368.e8

Subventions

Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : KL2 TR002346
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P50 CA095815
Pays : United States

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Références

J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2002 Jan;6(1):17-22
pubmed: 17050987
J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2012 Nov;21(11):1132-8
pubmed: 22873781
Acad Med. 2004 Dec;79(12):1139-47
pubmed: 15563647
J Soc Serv Res. 2011;37(2):113-123
pubmed: 21566702
Int J Cancer. 2003 Jul 10;105(5):687-91
pubmed: 12740919
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014 Nov 7;63(44):1004-9
pubmed: 25375072
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007 Feb;62(2):191-5
pubmed: 17339645
J Rural Health. 2012 Jan;28(1):63-72
pubmed: 22236316
Am J Prev Med. 2015 Aug;49(2):161-71
pubmed: 25960393
J Am Board Fam Pract. 2001 Mar-Apr;14(2):123-30
pubmed: 11314919
Health Equity. 2017 May 01;1(1):61-76
pubmed: 28905047
Prev Chronic Dis. 2016 Nov 10;13:E154
pubmed: 27831682
Environ Health Perspect. 2007 May;115(5):817-24
pubmed: 17520073
Am J Prev Med. 2012 Dec;43(6 Suppl 5):S425-34
pubmed: 23157761
Health Educ Behav. 2016 Apr;43(2):201-7
pubmed: 26293458
Prev Med. 2007 Aug-Sep;45(2-3):93-106
pubmed: 17651792
Prev Med. 2016 Oct;91:70-75
pubmed: 27496395
J Rural Health. 2005 Spring;21(2):149-57
pubmed: 15859052
Matern Child Health J. 2015 Jul;19(7):1455-63
pubmed: 25630404
Public Health Rep. 2007 Mar-Apr;122(2):177-89
pubmed: 17357360
Soc Work. 1993 Nov;38(6):705-12
pubmed: 8256142
West J Nurs Res. 2000 Nov;22(7):796-811
pubmed: 11077548
Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Dec;104(6):1355-61
pubmed: 15572502
Am J Public Health. 2005 Feb;95(2):299-304
pubmed: 15671468
Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2005 Oct;14(4):655-69, v
pubmed: 16226685
Cancer. 2008 Nov 15;113(10 Suppl):2910-8
pubmed: 18980274
J Aging Health. 2006 Dec;18(6):852-68
pubmed: 17099137
J Community Health. 2017 Aug;42(4):770-778
pubmed: 28155005
J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2012 May;23(2):752-67
pubmed: 22643622
Am J Prev Med. 2012 Dec;43(6 Suppl 5):S422-4
pubmed: 23157760
Lancet. 2008 Nov 8;372(9650):1661-9
pubmed: 18994664
CA Cancer J Clin. 2017 Jan;67(1):7-30
pubmed: 28055103
Am J Public Health. 2004 Dec;94(12):2098-103
pubmed: 15569960
Curr Probl Cancer. 2007 May-Jun;31(3):157-81
pubmed: 17543946
Public Health Rep. 2013 Nov;128 Suppl 3:1-4
pubmed: 24179272

Auteurs

Lindsay M Kuroki (LM)

Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO. Electronic address: kurokil@wustl.edu.

L Stewart Massad (LS)

Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO.

Candice Woolfolk (C)

Division of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO.

Tess Thompson (T)

Health Communication Research Laboratory, Brown School of Social Work, Washington University, St. Louis, MO.

Amy McQueen (A)

Health Communication Research Laboratory, Brown School of Social Work, Washington University, St. Louis, MO.

Matthew W Kreuter (MW)

Health Communication Research Laboratory, Brown School of Social Work, Washington University, St. Louis, MO.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH