Repeat mammography screening among unmarried women with and without a disability
- PMID: 19775912
- PMCID: PMC2783996
- DOI: 10.1016/j.whi.2009.08.001
Repeat mammography screening among unmarried women with and without a disability
Abstract
Objectives: Unmarried women with disabilities may be a particularly vulnerable group for underutilization of repeat mammography screening. Our goal was to compare the breast cancer screening experiences of unmarried women with disabilities (WWD) versus women with no disabilities (WND), and determine whether these experiences are associated with adherence to repeat screening.
Methods: We conducted a matched cohort study of 93 WWD and 93 WND to compare mammography experiences by disability status, examine rates of repeat mammography by disability status, and identify factors that are associated with repeat mammography.
Results: WWD were less likely to be on-schedule than WND in univariable (54.8% vs. 71.0%; relative risk, 0.77; 95% confidence limits, 0.61, 0.97), but not multivariable, analyses. In multivariable analyses, there was a significant interaction between disability status and positive experiences as the reasons for returning to the same mammography facility. Among WND, repeat screening ranged from 59% to 86%, depending on the number of positive experiences endorsed (range, 1-5). In contrast, among WWD, screening rates were only 37% among those who did not report any positive experiences and increased to a maximum of 60% regardless of whether women endorsed one to four or all five positive experiences. Severity and type of disability were not associated with repeat screening.
Conclusion: WWD may be less likely than WND to remain on-schedule for mammography. WWD who do not report any positive experiences as reasons for returning to a mammography facility may be at particularly high risk of underutilization of screening.
Conflict of interest statement
Similar articles
-
Predictors of mammography use in older women with disability: the patients' perspectives.Med Oncol. 2011 Dec;28 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S8-14. doi: 10.1007/s12032-010-9656-3. Epub 2010 Sep 21. Med Oncol. 2011. PMID: 20857346 Free PMC article.
-
Factors associated with repeat mammography screening.J Fam Pract. 2000 Dec;49(12):1104-12. J Fam Pract. 2000. PMID: 11132060
-
Breast and cervical cancer screening practices among disabled women aged 40-75: does quality of the experience matter?J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2008 Oct;17(8):1321-9. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2007.0591. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2008. PMID: 18788985 Free PMC article.
-
[Mammography and cervical cancer screening--a systematic review about women's knowledge, attitudes and participation in Germany].Gesundheitswesen. 2012 Nov;74(11):722-35. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1286271. Epub 2011 Oct 19. Gesundheitswesen. 2012. PMID: 22012563 German.
-
Co-design of an intervention to optimize mammographic screening participation in women with obesity and/or physical disabilities.Radiography (Lond). 2024 May;30(3):951-963. doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2024.04.011. Epub 2024 Apr 23. Radiography (Lond). 2024. PMID: 38657389
Cited by
-
'It's easier said than done': perspectives on mammography from women with intellectual disabilities.Ann Fam Med. 2011 Mar-Apr;9(2):142-7. doi: 10.1370/afm.1231. Ann Fam Med. 2011. PMID: 21403141 Free PMC article.
-
A Systematic Review to Evaluate the Barriers to Breast Cancer Screening in Women with Disability.J Clin Med. 2024 Jun 2;13(11):3283. doi: 10.3390/jcm13113283. J Clin Med. 2024. PMID: 38892994 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Cancer Disparities Experienced by People with Disabilities.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jul 27;19(15):9187. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19159187. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022. PMID: 35954534 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Ahmed NU, Smith GL, Haber G, Belcon MC. Are women with functional limitations at high risk of underutilization of mammography screening? Womens Health Issues. 2009;19(1):79–87. - PubMed
-
- Alexander MT, Kufera JA. Paper presented at the New England SAS Users Group. Baltimore, MD: 2007. Butting heads on matched cohort analysis using SAS software.
-
- American Cancer Society. Guidelines for the Early Detection of Cancer. Retrieved February 26, 2007, from http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_2_3X_ACS_Cancer_Detection_....
-
- Balluz L, Ahluwalia IB, Murphy W, Mokdad A, Giles W, Harris VB. Surveillance for certain health behaviors among selected local areas--United States, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2002. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2004;53(5):1–100. - PubMed
-
- Banerjee M, George J, Song EY, Roy A, Hryniuk W. Tree-based model for breast cancer prognostication. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(13):2567–2575. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical