Article

Participación en cribados mamográficos y creencias de salud: una perspectiva de proceso

Psicooncología, 2007
Source: OAI

ABSTRACT Objetivo: Analizar las creencias y actitudes ante el cáncer de mama y la mamografía utilizando las variables sociocognitivas postuladas por el Modelo de Creencias de Salud asociadas a diferentes estadíos de adopción de la conducta mamográfica.
Método: Se comparan diversos grupos de mujeres establecidos en función de su nivel de adopción de la conducta mamográfica. La muestra ha estado formada por 127 mujeres invitadas a participar en el Programa de Detección Precoz del Cáncer de Mama de la Generalitat Valenciana. Se evaluaron dos tipos de variables: (i) sociocognitivas: gravedad percibida del cáncer de mama, vulnerabilidad percibida al cáncer de mama, motivación general para la salud, beneficios y barreras percibidas de la mamografía, e información sobre el cáncer de mama y sus técnicas de detección precoz. y (ii) estadío de adopción de la conducta mamográfica: precontemplación, contemplación, acción, acción-mantenimiento y recaída.
Resultados: Todas las variables sociocognitivas evaluadas establecen diferencias estadís¬ticamente significativas. Algunas (información, beneficios y barreras) diferencian entre estadíos de adopción, mientras que otras lo hacen en función de si la conducta mamográfica se realiza, con la periodicidad recomendada, dentro de un programa de detección precoz o de forma voluntaria por parte de la mujer (gravedad, vulnerabilidad y motivación).
Conclusiones: Los resultados de este estudio confirman que las variables socio cognitivas postuladas por el Modelo de Creencias de Salud pueden predecir el movimiento progresivo hacia estadíos más comprometidos con la conducta mamográfica. Estos resultados contribuyen a orientar las campañas dirigidas a incrementar la participación de las mujeres en programas de cribado mamográfico. Objective: To analyze the beliefs and attitudes towards breast cancer and mammography using the sociocognitive variables postulated by the Health Beliefs Model associated with different stages of mammography adoption.
Methods: A cross-sectional design was used. The sample consisted of Spanish women (N= 127) invited to participate in the Breast Cancer Detection Programme of the Valencian Regional Government (Spain). Two types of variables were assessed: (i) Socio-cognitive: perceived severity of breast cancer, perceived susceptibility to breast cancer, general health motivation, benefits and barriers perceived to mammography, and the degree of information about breast cancer and screening techniques. and (ii) Stage of mammography adoption: Precontemplation, Contemplation, Action, Action-Maintenance and Relapse.
Results: All sociocognitive variables showed significant statistic differences. Some of them (information, benefits, and barriers) showed differences between stages of adoption, while others (severity, susceptibility, and motivation) discriminated between women in Action-maintenance stage participating in a breast cancer screening programme, and women in the same stage, adopting the mammography behaviour on their own. Conclusions. Our findings show that the sociocognitive variables of Health Beliefs Model are associated with the progressive movement towards more developed stages of mammography adoption. The results of this research may improve public campaings addressed to increase women participation in breast cancer mammography screening programmes.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
149 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine the efficacy of screening mammography by age, number of mammographic views per screen, screening interval, and duration of follow-up. Literature review and meta-analysis. DATA IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS: Literature search of English-language studies reported from January 1966 to October 31, 1993, using MEDLINE, manual literature review, and consultation with experts. A total of 13 studies were selected, and their results were combined using meta-analytic techniques based on the assumption of fixed effects. The overall summary relative risk (RR) estimate for breast cancer mortality for women aged 50 to 74 years undergoing screening mammography compared with those who did not was 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.83). The magnitude of the benefit in this age group was similar regardless of number of mammographic views per screen, screening interval, or duration of follow-up. In contrast, none of the summary RR estimates for women aged 40 to 49 years was significantly less than 1.0, irrespective of screening intervention or duration of follow-up. The overall summary RR estimate in women aged 40 to 49 years was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.76 to 1.13); the summary RR estimate for those studies that used two-view mammography was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.68 to 1.12) compared with 1.02 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.44) for those studies that used one-view mammography, and for those studies with 7 to 9 years of follow-up, the summary RR estimate was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.27) compared with 0.83 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.06) for those studies with 10 to 12 years of follow-up. Screening mammography significantly reduces breast cancer mortality in women aged 50 to 74 years after 7 to 9 years of follow-up, regardless of screening interval or number of mammographic views per screen. There is no reduction in breast cancer mortality in women aged 40 to 49 years after 7 to 9 years of follow-up. Screening mammography may be effective in reducing breast cancer mortality in women aged 40 to 49 years after 10 to 12 years of follow-up, but the same benefit could probably be achieved by beginning screening at menopause or 50 years of age.
    JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 02/1995; 273(2):149-54. · 29.98 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: From numerous studies on breast cancer it can be concluded that no single measure can lessen the burden of this frequent cancer in women in all developed countries. Complex strategies including primary prevention by identification of risk factors and their modification, secondary prevention by earlier detection and tertiary prevention by improving treatment outcome are needed to control the disease. Besides age, the established breast cancer risk factors include certain benign breast diseases, family history, ionising radiation, some reproductive factors and obesity. Primary prevention includes general recommendation for healthy lifestyle, e.g., avoidance of obesity, proper diet, physical activity and moderate alcohol consumption. Randomised controlled trials conducted in the USA, Canada, Scotland and Sweden have shown that regular mammography, alone or in combination with clinical examination, is effective in reducing mortality for about 30% in women over the age of 50, and much less in younger population. However, mammography screening has several drawbacks, the major being its tendency towards false positive and false negative results with all their potential psychosocial consequences. High quality assurance and control, as well as effective and readily available treatment, all of which demand high investments, are indispensable for good results. Even in the absence of organised screening, the availability of effective treatment may contribute to reduction in breast cancer mortality.
    Annals of Oncology 02/1999; 10 Suppl 6:121-7. · 7.38 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A 1999 study found no decrease in breast-cancer mortality in Sweden, where screening has been recommended since 1985. We therefore reviewed the methodological quality of the mammography trials and an influential Swedish meta-analysis, and did a meta-analysis ourselves. We searched the Cochrane Library for trials and asked the investigators for further details. Meta-analyses were done with Review Manager (version 4.0). Baseline imbalances were shown for six of the eight identified trials, and inconsistencies in the number of women randomised were found in four. The two adequately randomised trials found no effect of screening on breast-cancer mortality (pooled relative risk 1.04 [95% CI 0.84-1.27]) or on total mortality (0.99 [0.94-1.05]). The pooled relative risk for breast-cancer mortality for the other trials was 0.75 (0.67-0.83), which was significantly different (p=0.005) from that for the unbiased trials. The Swedish meta-analysis showed a decrease in breast-cancer mortality but also an increase in total mortality (1.06 [1.04-1.08]); this increase disappeared after adjustment for an imbalance in age. Screening for breast cancer with mammography is unjustified. If the Swedish trials are judged to be unbiased, the data show that for every 1000 women screened biennially throughout 12 years, one breast-cancer death is avoided whereas the total number of deaths is increased by six. If the Swedish trials (apart from the Malmö trial) are judged to be biased, there is no reliable evidence that screening decreases breast-cancer mortality.
    The Lancet 02/2000; 355(9198):129-34. · 39.06 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

View
46 Downloads
Available from
Jun 4, 2014