Inequalities In Screening Uptake Research Articles

Cancer prevention over the life course

Abstract Within a life course epidemiology framework, the etiology and prevention of cancer are informed at different ages from a social, behavioral, and biological perspective (1). Due to population aging, the burden of cancer increases and calls for new cancer prevention and screening strategies. In this introduction, we will discuss the issues of cancer screening among older adults and inequalities in screening uptake, and how vulnerable population preventive strategies can reduce these health inequities.

Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial (YLST) pathway navigation study: a protocol for a nested randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effect of a pathway navigation intervention on lung cancer screening uptake

IntroductionLung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death globally. In 2022 the UK National Screening Committee recommended the implementation of a national targeted lung cancer screening programme, aiming...

Socioeconomic differences in discrepancies between expected and experienced discomfort from colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy

BackgroundSocial inequalities in colorectal cancer screening participation are evident. Barriers to screening participation include discomfort from diagnostic modalities. We aimed to describe the discomfort experienced from colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) and investigate the discrepancy between expected and experienced discomfort stratified by socioeconomic status. MethodsA randomised controlled trial was conducted offering half of the colorectal cancer screening invitees the choice between CCE and colonoscopy after a positive faecal immunochemical test. This paper includes those who elected to undergo CCE. A positive CCE elicited referral for a therapeutic colonoscopy. Participants reported their discomfort from CCE and from any following colonoscopies in electronically distributed questionnaires. Discomfort was measured using visual analogue scales and compared between socioeconomic subgroups determined by educational level and income. ResultsThe experienced discomfort from CCE and colonoscopy differed significantly between educational levels but not income levels. The bowel preparation contributed the most to the experienced discomfort in both CCE and colonoscopy. The discrepancy between expected and experienced discomfort from colonoscopy increased with increasing educational and income levels. A similar trend was seen in CCE between educational levels but not income levels. ConclusionsNone of the results indicated a higher discomfort in lower socioeconomic subgroups. Regardless of the investigation modality, the bowel preparation was the main contributor to experienced discomfort. The discrepancy between expected and experienced discomfort did not seem to be larger in lower socioeconomic subgroups, indicating that this is not a major barrier causing inequalities in screening uptake. This is the first study investigating individual discomfort discrepancy in both CCE and colonoscopy, while being able to stratify by socioeconomic status.

Socioeconomic differences in expected discomfort from colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy

Individual income and educational level are associated with participation rates in colorectal cancer screening. We aimed to investigate the expected discomfort from the endoscopic diagnostic modalities of colonoscopy and colon capsule endoscopy in different socioeconomic groups as a potential barrier for participation. In a randomized clinical trial within the Danish colorectal cancer screening program, we distributed questionnaires to 2031 individuals between August 2020 and December 2022 to investigate the expected procedural and overall discomfort from investigations using visual analogue scales. Socioeconomic status was determined by household income and educational level. Multivariate continuous ordinal regressions were performed to estimate the odds of higher expected discomfort. The expected procedural and overall discomfort from both modalities were significantly higher with increasing educational levels and income, except for procedural discomfort from colon capsule endoscopy between income quartiles. The odds ratios for higher expected discomfort increased significantly with increasing educational level, whereas the differences between income groups were less substantial. Bowel preparation contributed most to expected discomfort in colon capsule endoscopy, whereas in colonoscopy, the procedure itself was the largest contributor. Individuals with prior experiences of colonoscopy reported significantly lower expected overall but not procedural discomfort from colonoscopy. The threshold for acceptable discomfort between subgroups is unknown, but the expected discomfort in colon capsule endoscopy and colonoscopy was higher in higher socioeconomic subgroups, suggesting that expected discomfort is not a significant contributor to the inequalities in screening uptake.

Cervical cancer (over-)screening in Europe: Balancing organised and opportunistic programmes.

Cervical cancer (CC) over-screening has been understudied in Europe, yet is relevant for approaching inequalities in screening uptake. Focusing on countries' screening strategies (opportunistic systems versus organised programmes), we assess in which contexts CC over-screening is more prevalent, and which women are more likely to have engaged in cervical cancer screening (CCS) within the past year. A two-level (multilevel) design among screening women (N = 80,761) nested in 31 European countries was used to analyse data from the second wave (2013-2015) of the European Health Interview Survey. We focused on over-screening, defined as screening more frequently than the three-yearly screening interval prescribed in the European guidelines - that is, having screened within the past year. Higher levels of over-screening were observed in opportunistic systems compared to systems with organised programmes. In opportunistic systems, women with a higher socioeconomic position had a higher likelihood of being screened within the past year than their socioeconomic counterparts. Moreover, these differences diminished under organised programmes. Contexts with organised CCS programmes are more efficiently reducing over-screening, and enforcing the European guidelines. We suggest that the physician-patient relationship is an essential pathway for explaining socioeconomic differences in CC (over-)screening and for future interventions.

Cervical cancer screening programs and their context-dependent effect on inequalities in screening uptake: a dynamic interplay between public health policy and welfare state redistribution

BackgroundWhile organized and opportunistic cervical cancer screening (CCS) programs implemented across the European Union have increased participation rates, barriers to socioeconomically deprived women remain substantial, implying high levels of inequality in CCS uptake.AimThis study assesses how the screening strategy (as a score based on the availability of organized population-based CCS programs), accessibility of the healthcare system (as an index of out-of-pocket expenditure as a proportion of total healthcare costs, public health expenditure as a percentage of total GDP, and general practitioner (GP) density per 10′000 inhabitants) and social protection (as a decommodification index), impact education- and income-based inequalities in CCS uptake.MethodsA two-level design with 25–64-year-old women (N = 96′883), eligible for Pap smear screening, nested in 28 European countries, was used to analyze data from the European Health Interview Survey’s second wave, using multilevel logistic regression modelling.ResultsClear educational and income gradients in CCS uptake were found, which were smaller in countries with organized CCS programs, higher accessibility of the healthcare system and a higher level of decommodification. Furthermore, three-way interaction terms revealed that these gradients were smaller when organized CCS programs were implemented in countries with better accessibility of the healthcare system or a high level of decommodification.ConclusionThis study indicates that the combination of organized screening and high accessibility of the healthcare system or social protection is essential for having lower levels of inequality in CCS uptake. In such countries, the structural threshold for poorer and lower educated women to engage in CCS is lower. This may be explained by them having a better interaction with their GP, who may convince them of the screening test, lower out-of-pocket payments, and financial support to buffer against a disadvantageous position on the labor market.

Does poor mental health explain socio-demographic gradients in breast cancer screening uptake? A population-based study.

Research from the USA indicates disparities in breast cancer screening uptake for women with poor mental health. However, no attempt has been made to examine the contribution of poor mental health to socio-demographic variations in breast screening uptake. The current study aims to examine the impact of self-reported chronic poor mental health on attendance at breast screening in the UK, and to what extent this explains socio-demographic inequalities in screening uptake. Breast screening records were linked to 2011 Census records within the Northern Ireland Longitudinal Study. This identified a cohort of 57328 women who were followed through one 3-year screening cycle of the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme. Information on mental health status, in addition to other individual and household-level attributes, was derived from the 2011 Census. Logistic regression was employed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of attendance at screening. 10.7% of women in the cohort reported poor mental health, and in fully adjusted analyses, these individuals were 23% less likely to attend breast screening (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.73-0.82). Although poor mental health was a strong predictor of screening uptake, it did not explain the observed inequalities in uptake by socio-economic status, marital status, or area of residence. This study provides novel evidence of inequalities in breast screening uptake for women with chronic poor mental health in the UK. Targeted interventions are necessary to ensure equitable screening access and to enhance overall mortality benefit.

The effects of reminders for colorectal cancer screening: participation and inequality

To investigate the effect of sending out reminders for colorectal cancer screening on socioeconomic and demographic inequalities in screening uptake. All citizens aged 50-74 in Denmark are invited every 2years for colorectal cancer screening. Non-participants receive an electronically distributed reminder. Data for these analyses were derived from national registers. Socioeconomic status was measured by income and educational level. Demographic variables included age, gender and marital status, and the analyses were stratified by immigration status. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to estimate the odds of non-participation for invited citizens and for reminded citizens divided by socioeconomic and demographic predictors. Of 763,511 native Danes invited for screening from 2014 to 2015, 387,116 (50.70%) participated after the initial invitation and 133,470 after receiving a reminder. Differences in participation were present in relation to all subgroups among both the invited citizens and reminded citizens. Differences persisted after full model adjustments with reductions for demographic variables. Odds ratio (OR) for non-participation in the eldest age group was 0.32 (95% CI, 0.32; 0.33) before and 1.11 (95% CI 1, 0.08; 1.14) after the reminder, compared to those under 55years. OR for the 4th income quartile was 0.54 (95% CI, 0.53; 0.55) before and 0.44 (95% CI, 0.43; 0.45) after the reminder, compared to 1st quartile. Reminders increased the overall participation, and the inequalities in participation in relation to demographic factors were reduced after the distribution of reminders. The age differences were especially reduced. The inequalities in participation related to socioeconomic status were, however, slightly increased after reminder distribution.

Income inequality in uptake of voluntary versus organised breast cancer screening: evidence from the British Household Panel Survey

BackgroundThis paper measures income-related inequality in uptake of breast cancer screening among women before and after a policy change to extend the screening programme to women aged 65 to 70. Prior to programme expansion women aged 50 to 64 were invited for screening under the national cancer screening programme in England and Wales whereas women in the 65 to 70 age cohort could elect to be screened by personally organising a screen. This will give a deeper insight into the nature of inequality in screening and the impact of policies aimed at widening the access related to age on inequality of uptake.MethodsTaking advantage of this natural experiment, inequality is quantified across the different age cohorts and time periods with the use of concentration indices (CI). Using data from the British Household Panel Survey, information on screening attendance, equivalised household income and age was taken for the three years prior to the programme expansion and the three years immediately following the policy change.ResultsResults show that following the expansion, inequality significantly reduced for the 50-64 age group, prior to the expansion there was a pro-rich inequality in screening uptake. There is also evidence of a reduction in income inequality in screening uptake among those aged 65 to 70 and an increase in the number of women attending screening from this older age cohort.ConclusionsThis indicates that an organised breast screening programme is likely to reduce income related inequality over a screening programme where women must organise their own screen. This is important when breast screening is one of the main methods used to detect breast cancer at an earlier stage which improves outcomes for women and reduces treatment costs.

Sociodemographic characteristics of nonparticipants in the Danish colorectal cancer screening program: a nationwide cross-sectional study.

IntroductionFecal occult blood tests are recommended for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in Europe. Recently, the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) has come into use. Sociodemographic differences between participants and nonparticipants may be less pronounced when using FIT as there are no preceding dietary restrictions and only one specimen is required. The aim of this study was to examine the associations between sociodemographic characteristics and nonparticipation for both genders, with special emphasis on those who actively unsubscribe from the program.MethodsThe study was a national, register-based, cross-sectional study among men and women randomized to be invited to participate in the prevalence round of the Danish CRC screening program between March 1 and December 31, 2014. Prevalence ratios (PRs) were used to quantify the association between sociodemographic characteristics and nonparticipation (including active nonparticipation). PRs were assessed using Poisson regression with robust error variance.ResultsThe likelihood of being a nonparticipant was highest in the younger part of the population; however, for women, the association across age groups was U-shaped. Female immigrants were more likely to be nonparticipants. Living alone, being on social welfare, and having lower income were factors that were associated with nonparticipation among both men and women. For both men and women, there was a U-shaped association between education and nonparticipation. For both men and women, the likelihood of active nonparticipation rose with age; it was lowest among non-western immigrants and highest among social welfare recipients.ConclusionSocial inequality in screening uptake was evident among both men and women in the Danish CRC screening program, even though the program is free of charge and the screening kit is based on FIT and mailed directly to the individuals. Interventions are needed to bridge this gap if CRC screening is to avoid aggravating existing inequalities in CRC-related morbidity and mortality.

Effects of evidence-based strategies to reduce the socioeconomic gradient of uptake in the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (ASCEND): four cluster-randomised controlled trials

SummaryBackgroundUptake in the national colorectal cancer screening programme in England varies by socioeconomic status. We assessed four interventions aimed at reducing this gradient, with the intention of improving the health benefits of screening.MethodsAll people eligible for screening (men and women aged 60–74 years) across England were included in four cluster-randomised trials. Randomisation was based on day of invitation. Each trial compared the standard information with the standard information plus the following supplementary interventions: trial 1 (November, 2012), a supplementary leaflet summarising the gist of the key information; trial 2 (March, 2012), a supplementary narrative leaflet describing people's stories; trial 3 (June, 2013), general practice endorsement of the programme on the invitation letter; and trial 4 (July–August, 2013) an enhanced reminder letter with a banner that reiterated the screening offer. Socioeconomic status was defined by the Index of Multiple Deprivation score for each home address. The primary outcome was the socioeconomic status gradient in uptake across deprivation quintiles. This study is registered, number ISRCTN74121020.FindingsAs all four trials were embedded in the screening programme, loss to follow-up was minimal (less than 0·5%). Trials 1 (n=163 525) and 2 (n=150 417) showed no effects on the socioeconomic gradient of uptake or overall uptake. Trial 3 (n=265 434) showed no effect on the socioeconomic gradient but was associated with increased overall uptake (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·07, 95% CI 1·04–1·10, p<0·0001). In trial 4 (n=168 480) a significant interaction was seen with socioeconomic status gradient (p=0·005), with a stronger effect in the most deprived quintile (adjusted OR 1·11, 95% CI 1·04–1·20, p=0·003) than in the least deprived (1·00, 0·94–1·06, p=0·98). Overall uptake was also increased (1·07, 1·03–1·11, p=0·001).InterpretationOf four evidence-based interventions, the enhanced reminder letter reduced the socioeconomic gradient in screening uptake, but further reducing inequalities in screening uptake through written materials alone will be challenging.FundingNational Institute for Health Research.

Small-area spatio-temporal analyses of participation rates in the mammography screening program in the city of Dortmund (NW Germany).

BackgroundThe population-based mammography screening program (MSP) was implemented by the end of 2005 in Germany, and all women between 50 and 69 years are actively invited to a free biennial screening examination. However, despite the expected benefits, the overall participation rates range only between 50 and 55 %. There is also increasing evidence that belonging to a vulnerable population, such as ethnic minorities or low income groups, is associated with a decreased likelihood of participating in screening programs. This study aimed to analyze in more detail the intra-urban variation of MSP uptake at the neighborhood level (i.e. statistical districts) for the city of Dortmund in northwest Germany and to identify demographic and socioeconomic risk factors that contribute to non-response to screening invitations.MethodsThe numbers of participants by statistical district were aggregated over the three periods 2007/2008, 2009/2010, and 2011/2012. Participation rates were calculated as numbers of participants per female resident population averaged over each 2-year period. Bayesian hierarchical spatial models extended with a temporal and spatio-temporal interaction effect were used to analyze the participation rates applying integrated nested Laplace approximations (INLA). The model included explanatory covariates taken from the atlas of social structure of Dortmund.ResultsGenerally, participation rates rose for all districts over the time periods. However, participation was persistently lowest in the inner city of Dortmund. Multivariable regression analysis showed that migrant status and long-term unemployment were associated with significant increases of non-attendance in the MSP.ConclusionLow income groups and immigrant populations are clustered in the inner city of Dortmund and the observed spatial pattern of persistently low participation in the city center is likely linked to the underlying socioeconomic gradient. This corresponds with the findings of the ecological regression analysis manifesting socioeconomically deprived neighborhoods as risk factors for low attendance in the MSP. Spatio-temporal surveillance of participation in cancer screening programs may be used to identify spatial inequalities in screening uptake and plan spatially focused interventions.

Obstacles to the uptake of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screenings: what remains to be achieved by French national programmes?

BackgroundIn France, equality in access to screening has been one of the main thrusts of public policies implemented between 2009 and 2013 (the national cancer plan). Our aim in this study was to analyse the obstacles to and levers for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening uptake and their trends over time.MethodsBased on representative data from the French Health Care and Health Insurance Survey (three independent, cross-sectional surveys: 2006, 2008, and 2010), multivariate logistic regressions were used to model the association between the nonuse of screening for the three cancers and various independent variables. Then, interactions with survey year dummies allowed the changes in the determinants of these cancer screenings over time to be estimated.ResultsWhereas the incentives for screening were strengthened during the period considered, cervical and breast cancer screenings decreased, and colorectal cancer screenings increased sharply (from 18.2% (95% CI = [17.0-19.4]) in 2006 to 38.9% (95% CI = [37.4-40.5] in 2010. Under-users of the three cancer screenings were primarily unskilled workers (ORcervix = 1.64 [1.38-1.95]), individuals without complementary health insurance (ORbreast = 2.05 [1.68-2.51]), or individuals with free complementary health insurance who more rarely use outpatient care. Moreover, individuals reporting either risky behaviours, namely heavy smokers (ORcolorectal = 1.70) and high-risk drinkers (ORcervix = 1.42) or very safe behaviours, namely neither smoking nor drinking, underused screenings. Despite the implementation of national programmes for breast and colorectal cancer screenings, the disparities and inequalities in screening uptake did not decrease over the study period.ConclusionsThese results demonstrate the need for additional primary prevention efforts targeting the identified under-users by focusing on, for instance, individuals with a very healthy lifestyle. Health authorities could also intensify their efforts to promote increased access to screening for the most disadvantaged individuals.

Sociodemographic and attitudinal correlates of cervical screening uptake in a national sample of women in Britain

Sociodemographic and attitudinal correlates of self-reported cervical screening uptake were investigated among 1307 women in the target age group who participated in two national surveys conducted in Britain in 1999. Evidence for inequalities in screening uptake was mixed. Of the socioeconomic indicators, only age of completed full-time education showed a significant effect in the multivariate analysis. The strong effects of car ownership and housing tenure in the univariate analyses were eliminated by controlling for marital status, which showed a robust association with uptake. Uptake was highest among married and separated women and lowest among single and widowed women. There was no evidence that the effects of marital status and education were mediated by the attitudinal variables. Anticipated embarrassment and attitudes to screening (e.g., “There's no point going for screening if you don’t have any symptoms”) were significant independent predictors of uptake. These findings suggest that information campaigns need to address feelings of embarrassment and lack of understanding of the rationale for screening and that efforts should be made to encourage single and widowed women to attend.