Dataset Information

Differences in cervical cancer screening between immigrants and nonimmigrants in Norway: a primary healthcare register-based study.

ABSTRACT: The prevalence of cervical cancer is high among some groups of immigrants. Although there is evidence of low participation in cervical cancer screening programs among immigrants, studies have been subject to selection bias and accounted for few immigrant groups. The aim of this study was to compare the proportion of several groups of immigrants versus nonimmigrants attending the cervical cancer-screening program in Norway. In addition, we aimed to study predictors for attendance to the screening program. Register-based study using merged data from four national registries. All Norwegian-born women (1?168?832) and immigrant women (152?800) of screening age for cervical cancer (25-69 years) registered in Norway in 2008 were included. We grouped the immigrants by world's geographic region and carried out descriptive analyses and constructed several logistic regression models. The main outcome variable was whether the woman was registered with a Pap smear in 2008 or not. Immigrants had lower rates of participation compared with Norwegian-born women; Western Europe [adjusted odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.84, 0.81-0.88], Eastern Europe (OR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.60-0.67), Asia (OR 0.74, 95% CI: 0.71-0.77), Africa (OR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.56-0.67) and South America (OR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.79-0.96). Younger age, higher income, residence in rural areas, and having a female general practitioner (GP) were associated with Pap smear. Longer residential time in Norway and having a nonimmigrant GP were associated with screening for some immigrant groups. Appropriate interventions targeting both immigrants and GPs need to be developed and evaluated.

SUBMITTER: Moen KA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5627531 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Differences in cervical cancer screening between immigrants and nonimmigrants in Norway: a primary healthcare register-based study.

Møen Kathy A KA Kumar Bernadette B Qureshi Samera S Diaz Esperanza E

European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) 20171101 6

The prevalence of cervical cancer is high among some groups of immigrants. Although there is evidence of low participation in cervical cancer screening programs among immigrants, studies have been subject to selection bias and accounted for few immigrant groups. The aim of this study was to compare the proportion of several groups of immigrants versus nonimmigrants attending the cervical cancer-screening program in Norway. In addition, we aimed to study predictors for attendance to the screening ...[more]

PMID: 27749381

Similar Datasets

Project description:Immigrants' utilization of primary health care (PHC) services differs from that of the host populations. However, immigrants are often classified in broad groups by continent of origin, and the heterogeneity within the same continent may hide variation in use among immigrant groups at a national level. Differences in utilization of PHC between sub-Saharan African immigrants have not received much attention.Registry-based study using merged data from the National Population Register and the Norwegian Health Economics Administration. African immigrants and their descendants registered in Norway in 2008 (36,366 persons) where included in this study. Using ?2 test and logistic regression models, we assessed the differences in the use of PHC, including general practitioner (GP) and emergency room (ER) services, and the distribution of morbidity burden for immigrants from Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Gambia. For the analyses, we used the number of visits and medical diagnoses from each consultation registered by the physician.Among the total studied population, 66.1% visited PHC within 1 year. The diagnoses registered were similar for all four immigrants groups, regardless of country of origin. Compared to immigrants from Somalia, the age and sex adjusted odds ratios (OR) for use of GP were significantly lower for Ethiopians (OR 0.91; 0.86-0.97), Eritreans (OR 0.85; 0.79-0.91), and Gambians (OR 0.88; 0.80-0.97). Similarly, we also observed lower use of ER among Ethiopians (OR 0.88; 0.81-0.95), Eritreans (OR 0.56; 0.51-0.62) and Gambians (OR 0.81; 0.71-0.92). However, immigrants from Somalia reduced their use of PHC with longer duration of stay in Norway. Differences between groups persisted after further adjustment for employment status.Despite the similarities in diagnoses among the sub-Saharan African immigrant groups in Norway, their use of PHC services differs by country of origin and length of stay. It is important to assess the reasons for the differences in these groups to identify barriers and facilitators to access to healthcare for future interventions.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The attendance to cervical cancer screening is low among immigrants in many high-income countries. Although several interventions have been experimentally tested,implementation remains a challenge. Several factors are an impediment, including the lack of methodological descriptions of the development and implementation of such interventions. In this paper,we present in detail the development, methodological challenges and practical implementation of a community based intervention aimed to increase the participation of immigrant women in cervical cancer screening in Norway. METHODS:This study was initially designed as a cluster randomized trial to be carried out in four geographical areas near Oslo between Feb-October 2017. Participants were immigrant women aged 25-69?years from Pakistan and Somalia. This paper describes the theoretical background for the development of the intervention,followed by challenges,the changes in the original design and solutions adopted related to the study design,recruitment and implementation of the intervention. The intervention was developed based on two theoretical frameworks, the Ecological and the Heron's six categories intervention framework. An oral 20-25?min presentation in the language of participants encompassing topics of cervical cancer and screening was given according to the needs detected in focus groups conducted at the beginning of the study,followed by an opportunity to raise questions and answering a short questionnaire. RESULTS:Contrary to the initial study design, this had to be converted into a non-randomised trial due to the difficulties associated with randomization of immigrant families who are finely scattered in heavily populated towns and a high risk of contamination. We therefore adopted a pragmatic approach and recruited women in the intervention areas through a variety of channels and institutions. Neighboring areas were considered to be non-randomised controls. Female researchers with Pakistani and Somali background invited as many women as possible in the intervention areas. Among the women who were invited to participate,42% of the Pakistani and 78% of Somali attended the meetings. CONCLUSION:Despite the careful development of a culturally adapted health intervention in collaboration with the community; randomization and recruitment of immigrants for community trials remains challenging. Nevertheless, sharing strategies to overcome specific challenges related to promoting health interventions for immigrants, can be of potential help to scale-up interventions and for building new research projects. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT03155581 . Retrospectively registered, on 16 May 2017.

Project description:BackgroundClinical trials in the research setting have demonstrated that primary human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening results in greater protection against cervical cancer compared with cytology, but evidence from real-life implementation was missing. To evaluate the effectiveness of HPV-based cervical screening within a real-life screening program, the organized, population-based cervical screening program in the capital region of Sweden offered either HPV- or cytology-based screening in a randomized manner through a randomized healthcare policy (RHP).Methods and findingsA total of 395,725 women aged 30 to 64 years that were invited for their routine cervical screening visit were randomized without blinding to either cytology-based screening with HPV triage (n = 183,309) or HPV-based screening, with cytology triage (n = 212,416 women) between September 1, 2014 and September 30, 2016 and follow-up through June 30, 2017. The main outcome was non-inferior detection rate of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+). Secondary outcomes included superiority in CIN2+ detection, screening attendance, and referral to histology. In total, 120,240 had a cervical screening sample on record in the study period in the HPV arm and 99,340 in the cytology arm and were followed for the outcomes of interest. In per-protocol (PP) analyses, the detection rate of CIN2+ was 1.03% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 to 1.10) in the HPV arm and 0.93% (0.87 to 0.99) in the cytology arm (p for non-inferiority <0.0001; odds ratio (OR) 1.11 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.22)). There were 46 cervical cancers detected in the HPV arm (0.04% (0.03 to 0.06)) and 48 cancers detected in the cytology arm (0.05% (0.04 to 0.07)) (p for non-inferiority <0.0001; OR 0.79 (0.53 to 1.18)). Intention-to-screen (ITS) analyses found few differences. In the HPV arm, there was a modestly increased attendance after new invitations (68.56% (68.31 to 68.80) vs. 67.71% (67.43 to 67.98); OR 1.02 (1.00 to 1.03)) and increased rate of referral with completed biopsy (3.89% (3.79 to 4.00) vs. 3.53% (3.42 to 3.65); OR 1.10 (1.05 to 1.15)). The main limitations of this analysis are that only the baseline results are presented, and there was an imbalance in invitations between the study arms.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed that a real-life RHP of primary HPV-based screening was acceptable and effective when evaluated against cytology-based screening, as indicated by comparable participation, referral, and detection rates.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01511328.

Project description:BackgroundDespite universal healthcare, socioeconomic differences in healthcare utilization (HCU) persist in modern welfare states. However, little is known of how HCU inequalities has developed over time. The aim of this study is to assess time trends of differences in utilization of primary and specialized care for the lowest (Q1) and highest (Q5) income quantiles and compare these to mortality.Methods and findingsUsing a repeated cross-sectional register-based study design, data on utilization of (i) primary; (ii) specialized outpatient; and (iii) inpatient care, as well as (iv) cause of death, were linked to family income and sociodemographic control variables (for instance, country of origin and marital status). The study sample comprised all individuals 16 years or older residing in Sweden any year during the study period and ranged from 7.1 million in year 2004 to 8.0 million year 2017. HCU and mortality for all disease as well as for the 5 disease groups causing most deaths were compared for the Q1 and Q5 using logistic regression, adjusting for sex, age, marital status, and birth country. The primary outcome measures were adjusted odds ratios (ORs), and regression coefficients of annual changes in these ORs log-transformed. Additionally, we conducted negative binominal regression to calculate adjusted rate ratios (RRs) comparing Q1 and Q5 with regard to number of disease specific healthcare encounters ≤5 years prior to death. In 2017, for all diseases combined, Q1 utilized marginally more primary and specialized outpatient care than Q5 (OR 1.07, 95% CI [1.07, 1.08]; p < 0.001, and OR 1.04, 95% CI [1.04, 1.05]; p < 0.001, respectively), and considerably more inpatient care (OR 1.44, 95% CI [1.43, 1.45]; p < 0.001). The largest relative inequality was observed for mortality (OR 1.78, 95% CI [1.74, 1.82]; p < 0.001). This pattern was broadly reproduced for each of the 5 disease groups. Time trends in HCU inequality varied by level of care. Each year, Q1 (versus Q5) used more inpatient care and suffered increasing mortality rates. However, utilization of primary and specialized outpatient care increased more among Q5 than in Q1. Finally, group differences in number of healthcare encounters ≤5 years prior to death demonstrated a similar pattern. For each disease group, primary and outpatient care encounters were fewer in Q1 than in Q5, while inpatient encounters were similar or higher in Q1. A main limitation of this study is the absence of data on self-reported need for care, which impedes quantifications of HCU inequalities each year.ConclusionsIncome-related differences in the utilization of primary and specialized outpatient care were considerably smaller than for mortality, and this discrepancy widened with time. Facilitating motivated use of primary and outpatient care among low-income groups could help mitigate the growing health inequalities.

Dataset Information

Differences in cervical cancer screening between immigrants and nonimmigrants in Norway: a primary healthcare register-based study.

Publications

Differences in cervical cancer screening between immigrants and nonimmigrants in Norway: a primary healthcare register-based study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets