scholarly journals The Development and Testing of Balanced Communication Material for a Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening Program

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca De Nard ◽  
Silvia Deandrea ◽  
Anan Judina Bastiampillai ◽  
Laura Cavazzana ◽  
Davide Carnevali ◽  
...  

Organized breast cancer screening (BCS) programs rely on written communication materials for achieving participation and informing women about screening-related benefits and limits. In order to achieve informed decisions and to maximize reader acceptance, the Agency for Health Protection of the metropolitan area of Milan aimed at improving the communication materials of the local BCS program through a multiphase, mixed-method process. Multidisciplinary working groups drafted three sets of materials: postal letters, an informative leaflet, and a question-and-answer online set. Readability was assessed using the Italian language-tailored Gulpease index. Suitability and Comprehensibility were assessed using the SAM + CAM instrument. User perception was investigated through “think aloud” interviews in two consecutive purposive samples. Participants’ intention to participate in the program was also assessed. After each phase was completed, materials were readapted, and previous phases were repeated, to maintain the pre-defined Gulpease and SAM + CAM targets. During the quality improvement process, the overall mean Gulpease and SAM + CAM scores increased from 65.5 (s. d. 10.4) to 67.7 (s. d. 8.2) and from 78 (s. d. 5.6) to 83 (s. d. 4.1), respectively. In light of the results of the first round of interviews, materials underwent rewriting and layout revision, which was generally appreciated during the second round, with a non-significant increase in the intention to participate in the program. However, negative emotions and miscomprehension concerning overdiagnosis were frequently reported, although less frequent in the second round, after rewording of the text. The mixed-method multistep process involving all the relevant key players allowed a balance among the multifaceted aspects of communication.

2020 ◽  
Vol 56 (5) ◽  
pp. 277-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrián González-Marrón ◽  
Juan Carlos Martín-Sánchez ◽  
Ferrán Garcia-Alemany ◽  
Encarna Martínez-Martín ◽  
Nuria Matilla-Santander ◽  
...  

Radiology ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 253 (2) ◽  
pp. 353-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nico Karssemeijer ◽  
Adriana M. Bluekens ◽  
David Beijerinck ◽  
Jan J. Deurenberg ◽  
Matthijs Beekman ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xi Zhang ◽  
Lei Yang ◽  
Shuo Liu ◽  
Huichao Li ◽  
Qingyu Li ◽  
...  

BackgroundMammography-based breast cancer screening has been widely implemented in many developed countries. Evidence was needed on participation and diagnostic performance of population-based breast cancer screening using ultrasound in China.MethodsWe used data from the Cancer Screening Program in Urban China in Beijing from 2014 to 2019 and was followed up until July 2020 by matching with the Beijing Cancer Registry database. Eligible women between the ages of 45 and 69 years were recruited from six districts and assessed their risk of breast cancer through an established risk scoring system. Women evaluated to be at high risk of breast cancer were invited to undergo both ultrasound and mammography. Participation rates were calculated, and their associated factors were explored. In addition, the performance of five different breast cancer screening modalities was evaluated in this study.ResultsA total of 49,161 eligible women were recruited in this study. Among them, 15,550 women were assessed as high risk for breast cancer, and 7,500 women underwent ultrasound and/or mammography as recommended, with a participation rate of 48.2%. The sensitivity of mammography alone, ultrasound alone, combined of ultrasound and mammography, ultrasound for primary screening followed by mammography for triage, and mammography for preliminary screening followed by ultrasound for triage were19.2%, 38.5%, 50.0%, 46.2%, and 19.2%, and the specificity were 96.1%, 98.6%, 94.7%, 97.6%, 95.7%, respectively. The sensitivity of combined ultrasound and mammography, ultrasound for primary screening followed by mammography for triage, was significantly higher than mammography alone (p=0.008 and p=0.039). Additionally, ultrasound alone (48,323 RMB ($7,550)) and ultrasound for primary screening followed by mammography for triage (55,927 RMB ($8,739)) were the most cost-effective methods for breast cancer screening than other modalities.ConclusionsUltrasound alone and ultrasound for primary screening and mammography are superior to mammography for breast cancer screening in high-risk Chinese women.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document