Dataset Information

Facilitators and barriers for the delivery and uptake of cervical cancer screening in Indonesia: a scoping review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Cervical cancer (CC) is the second most common female cancer. In Indonesia, national CC screening coverage is low at 12%, highlighting the need to investigate facilitators and barriers to screening.

Objective

This review synthesises research on facilitators and barriers to the delivery and uptake of CC screening; analyses them in terms of supply- and demand-side factors and their interconnectedness; and proposes recommendations for further research.

Methods

Medline Ovid, CINAHL, Global Health, Neliti, SINTA and Google Scholar were searched, applying a search string with keywords relevant to screening, CC and Indonesia. In total 34 records were included, all were publications on CC screening in Indonesia (2000-2020) in English or Indonesian. Records were analysed to identify findings relevant to the categories of barriers and facilitators, supply-and demand-side factors.

Results

Demand-side facilitators identified included: husband, family or social/peer support (14 studies); information availability, knowledge and awareness (12 studies); positive attitudes and strong perception of screening benefit and the seriousness of CC (12 studies); higher education and socioeconomic status (11 studies); having health insurance; and short distance to screening services (4 studies). Evidence on supply-side was limited. Supply-side facilitators included counselling and support (6 studies), and ease of access (6 studies). Demand-side barriers identified focused on: lack of knowledge/awareness and lack of confidence in screening (14 studies); fear, fatalism and shame (10 studies); time and transportation constraints (8 studies); and lack of husband approval and support (6 studies). Supply-side barriers included: lack of skilled screening providers (3 studies); lack of advocacy and health promotion (3 studies); resource constraints (3 studies); and lack of supervision and support for health care providers (3 studies).

Conclusions

Facilitators and barriers were mirrored in the supply- and demand-side findings. The geographical scope and population diversity of existing research is limited and further supply-side research is urgently needed.

SUBMITTER: Robbers GML

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8491705 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer worldwide. Organized screening has achieved significant reductions in cervical cancer incidence and mortality in many high-income countries (HICs). But the gap between HICs and low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) is still substantial as the highest burden of the disease is in LMICs. Cameroon is a LMIC, where cervical cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths among women, only 3–5% of eligible women have been screened and there is no effective national cervical cancer prevention program. Objective(s) Identify facilitators and barriers to the implementation and uptake of existing cervical cancer screening programs in Cameroon to inform the implementation of a comprehensive national program. Methods We conducted a scoping review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis, extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Google Scholar and five electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane library and Web of Science) were searched systematically from 2012 to 2022. Articles on cervical cancer screening programs in Cameroon were eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently screened search results and extracted relevant data. Results A total of 182 articles were identified using our search strategy, and 20 were included. There was scarcity of publications from the North, Adamawa, East and South regions of Cameroon. Barriers and facilitators found were presented using the World Health Organisation framework for health systems. Cross-cutting barriers were: (1) the lack of a national training curriculum for screening providers with no elaborate, harmonized screening and treatment algorithm for cervical precancers; and (2) women’s lack of information about cervical cancer screening activities. Conversely, provision of screening services at a low or no cost to women in some programs and the feasibility of using novel point of care screening methods like the Human Papillomavirus DNA test were identified as facilitators. Conclusion This scoping review indicates that there are knowledge and research gaps concerning the state of cervical cancer screening services in some regions of Cameroon. Moreover, it underlines the need for comprehensive cancer control policies and practices integrating all six-health system building blocks to reduce disparities between regions, and rural versus urban areas in Cameroon. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12939-023-01942-2.

Project description:IntroductionPre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an effective medication to reduce the risk of acquiring HIV. PrEP is available free of charge in the UK from sexual health clinics. Expanding PrEP delivery to community pharmacies holds promise and aligns with UK government goals to eliminate new cases of HIV by 2030. The aim of this scoping review was to describe the existing evidence about the barriers to and facilitators of community pharmacy oral PrEP delivery, for pharmacists and pharmacy clients, as aligned with the Capacity Opportunity, Motivation Behaviour (COM-B) Model.MethodsFive bibliographic and five review databases were searched from inception to August 2023. Literature of any study design was included if it discussed barriers and facilitators of community pharmacy PrEP delivery. Trial registrations, protocols and news articles were excluded.ResultsA total of 649 records were identified, 73 full texts were reviewed and 56 met the inclusion criteria, predominantly from high-income/westernized settings. Most of the included literature was original research (55%), from the United States (77%) conducted during or after the year 2020 (63%). Barriers to PrEP delivery for pharmacists included lack of knowledge, training and skills (capability), not having the necessary facilities (opportunity), concern about the costs of PrEP and believing that PrEP use could lead to risk behaviours and sexually transmitted infections (motivation). Facilitators included staff training (capability), time, the right facilities (opportunity), believing PrEP could be a source of profit and could reduce new HIV acquisitions (motivation). For clients, barriers included a lack of PrEP awareness (capability), pharmacy facilities (opportunity) and not considering pharmacists as healthcare providers (motivation). Facilitators included awareness of PrEP and pharmacist's training to deliver it (capability), the accessibility of pharmacies (opportunity) and having an interest in PrEP (motivation).DiscussionTo effectively enhance oral PrEP delivery in UK community pharmacies, the identified barriers and facilitators should be explored for UK relevance, addressed and leveraged at the pharmacy team, client and care pathway level.ConclusionsBy comprehensively considering all aspects of the COM-B framework, community pharmacies could become crucial providers in expanding PrEP accessibility, contributing significantly to HIV prevention efforts.

Project description:BackgroundGlobally, COVID-19 vaccines have proven to be instrumental for promoting population health by reducing illness from SARS-CoV-2. Vaccine certificates emerged as a potentially promising solution for encouraging vaccination and facilitating the safe reopening of society, however, they were controversial due to criticisms of infringing upon individual rights. While there is extensive literature describing the ethical, legal, and public health implications of vaccine certificates, there is currently a gap in knowledge about the association of vaccine certificates on vaccine uptake during the COVID-19 pandemic and barriers and facilitators to their use.ObjectivesThe objectives of this scoping review are to (i) describe the existing literature on the association of vaccine certificates on the rates of COVID-19 vaccine uptake across several countries and (ii) describe the intrinsic and extrinsic barriers or facilitators that moderate this relationship.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review based on PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRSIMA-ScR) guidelines. We searched three bibliographic databases (APA PsychInfo, Embase Classic + Embase, OVID-Medline) and preprint severs during the first week of July 2023. Three reviewers independently screened the studies based on pre-specified eligibility criteria and performed quality assessments of the primary literature and data extraction.ResultsSixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. 14 or these were surveys and 2 were modelling studies. The majority documented that vaccine certificates were significantly associated with increased rates of COVID-19 vaccine uptake (n = 12), motivated by factors such as travel/employer requirements, influence from the government/peers, and trust in the safety, efficacy, and science behind COVID-19 vaccines. Three studies had non-significant or mixed findings. Only one study found a significant decrease in COVID-19 vaccine uptake, motivated by pervasive distrust in the QR code-based system of digital vaccine certificates in Russia. Quality of survey studies was generally high.ConclusionOur findings provide insights into the existing literature on vaccine certificates association with vaccine uptake in several different jurisdictions and barriers and facilitators to their uptake. This information can be used to guide future examinations of the implementation of vaccine certificates and more effective implementations.

Project description:Digital health technology (DHT) has the potential to revolutionize healthcare delivery but its uptake has been low in clinical and research settings. The factors that contribute to the limited adoption of DHT, particularly in cardiovascular settings, are unclear. The objective of this review was to determine the barriers and facilitators of DHT uptake from the perspective of patients, clinicians, and researchers. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases for studies published from inception to May 2020 that reported barriers and/or facilitators of DHT adoption in cardiovascular care. We extracted data on study design, setting, cardiovascular condition, and type of DHT. We conducted a thematic analysis to identify barriers and facilitators of DHT uptake. The search identified 3075 unique studies, of which 29 studies met eligibility criteria. Studies employed: qualitative methods (n = 13), which included interviews and focus groups; quantitative methods (n = 5), which included surveys; or a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods (n = 11). Twenty-five studies reported patient-level barriers, most common of which were difficult-to-use technology (n=7) and a poor internet connection (n=7). Six studies reported clinician-level barriers, which included increased workload (n=4) and a lack of integration with electronic medical records (n=3).Twenty-four studies reported patient-level facilitators, which included improved communication with clinicians (n=10) and personalized technology (n=6). Four studies reported clinician-level facilitators, which included approval and organizational support from cardiology departments and/or hospitals (n=3) and technologies that improved efficiency (n=3). No studies reported researcher-level barriers or facilitators. In summary, internet access, user-friendliness, organizational support, workflow efficiency, and data integration were reported as important factors in the uptake of DHT by patients and clinicians. These factors can be considered when selecting and implementing DHTs in cardiovascular clinical settings.

Project description:ObjectivesLow-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) bear a disproportionate burden of cervical cancer mortality. We aimed to identify what is currently known about barriers to cervical cancer screening among women in LMICs and propose remedial actions.DesignThis was a systematic review using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms in Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. We also contacted medical associations and universities for grey literature and checked reference lists of eligible articles for relevant literature published in English between 2010 and 2020. We summarized the findings using a descriptive narrative based on themes identified as levels of the social ecological model.SettingWe included studies conducted in LMICs published in English between 2010 and 2020.ParticipantsWe included studies that reported on barriers to cervical cancer screening among women 15 years and older, eligible for cervical cancer screening.ResultsSeventy-nine articles met the inclusion criteria. We identified individual, cultural/traditional and religious, societal, health system, and structural barriers to screening. Lack of knowledge and awareness of cervical cancer in general and of screening were the most frequent individual level barriers. Cultural/traditional and religious barriers included prohibition of screening and unsupportive partners and families, while social barriers were largely driven by community misconceptions. Health system barriers included policy and programmatic factors, and structural barriers were related to geography, education and cost. Underlying reasons for these barriers included limited information about cervical cancer and screening as a preventive strategy, poorly resourced health systems that lacked policies or implemented them poorly, generalised limited access to health services, and gender norms that deprioritize the health needs of women.ConclusionA wide range of barriers to screening were identified across most LMICs. Urgent implementation of clear policies supported by health system capacity for implementation, community wide advocacy and information dissemination, strengthening of policies that support women's health and gender equality, and targeted further research are needed to effectively address the inequitable burden of cervical cancer in LMICs.