scholarly journals Rapid review of evaluation of interventions to improve participation in cancer screening services

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 127-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen W Duffy ◽  
Jonathan P Myles ◽  
Roberta Maroni ◽  
Abeera Mohammad
2021 ◽  
pp. 106404
Author(s):  
Mafo Yakubu ◽  
Olivia Meggetto ◽  
Yonda Lai ◽  
Leslea Peirson ◽  
Meghan Walker ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Alejandra Castanon ◽  
Matejka Rebolj ◽  
Francesca Pesola ◽  
Peter Sasieni

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted cervical cancer screening services. Assuming increases to screening capacity are unrealistic, we propose two recovery strategies: one extends the screening interval by 6 months for all and the other extends the interval by 36/60 months, but only for women who have already missed being screened. Methods Using routine statistics from England we estimate the number of women affected by delays to screening. We used published research to estimate the proportion of screening age women with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and progression rates to cancer. Under two recovery scenarios, we estimate the impact of COVID-19 on cervical cancer over one screening cycle (3 years at ages 25–49 and 5 years at ages 50–64 years). The duration of disruption in both scenarios is 6 months. In the first scenario, 10.7 million women have their screening interval extended by 6 months. In the second, 1.5 million women (those due to be screened during the disruption) miss one screening cycle, but most women have no delay. Results Both scenarios result in similar numbers of excess cervical cancers: 630 vs. 632 (both 4.3 per 100,000 women in the population). However, the scenario in which some women miss one screening cycle creates inequalities—they would have much higher rates of excess cancer: 41.5 per 100,000 delayed for screened women compared to those with a 6-month delay (5.9 per 100,000). Conclusion To ensure equity for those affected by COVID-19 related screening delays additional screening capacity will need to be paired with prioritising the screening of overdue women.


2021 ◽  
pp. 106801
Author(s):  
Raúl Murillo ◽  
Oscar Gamboa ◽  
Gustavo Hernández ◽  
Mauricio González ◽  
Peter Olejua ◽  
...  

1993 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. S. B. Vaile ◽  
M. Calnan ◽  
D. R. Rutter ◽  
Barbara Wall

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 266-274
Author(s):  
Gaudence Niyonsenga ◽  
Darius Gishoma ◽  
Ruth Sego ◽  
Marie Goretti Uwayezu ◽  
Bellancille Nikuze ◽  
...  

Background: Cervical cancer is the third most common cancer attacking women globally, and the second in Eastern Africa where Rwanda is located. Regular screening is an effective prevention approach for cervical cancer. Despite that, the screening rate for cervical cancer in Africa is estimated between 10% and 70%, with a number of barriers. This is especially the case in sub-Saharan Africa. In Rwanda, there is limited literature on the rate of use of screening services or the barriers to cervical screening. Objective: To assess knowledge, utilization, and barriers of cervical cancer screening among women attending selected district hospitals in Kigali, Rwanda. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study with a structured questionnaire was used to collect data. Nominal ‘yes’ or ‘no’ questions were used to gather data on knowledge and utilisation of cervical cancer and its screening. Likert-type scale questions were used to identify different barriers to screening services. Data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Respondents were selected by systematic random sampling from the database of women attending gynaecology services at three district hospitals in Kigali, Rwanda. Results: Three hundred and twenty-nine women responded to the survey. Half of the respondents (n = 165) had high knowledge level scores on cervical cancer screening. The cervical cancer screening rate was 28.3%. Utilization of screening was associated with knowledge (P = 0.000, r = -0.392) and selected demographic factors (P = 0.000). Individual barriers included poor knowledge on availability of screening services, community barriers included living in a rural area, and health provider and systems barriers included lack of awareness campaigns, negative attitudes of healthcare providers toward clients, and long waiting times; all barriers limit the access to screening services. Conclusion: A low rate of cervical cancer screening was identified for women attending selected district hospitals in Kigali-Rwanda due to various barriers. On-going education on cervical cancer and its screening is highly recommended. It is important that trained health providers encourage their clients to have cervical cancer screening and work to reduce related barriers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document