"According to an Australian study, although a higher proportion of skin cancer survivors perform SSE than the general population, only less than half of melanoma survivors (42%) and non-melanoma skin cancer patients (46%) performed SSE within the past year.50 Of the melanoma survivors who do perform SSEs, only 13.7%–22% of these individuals reported performing thorough SSEs.34,39,44 This means that over 75% of people in this high-risk group could be missing potential malignancies if SSEs were the only form of secondary prevention, highlighting the importance of two things: 1) the need for increased education on how to conduct proper and thorough SSEs, as only half of melanoma survivors reported having received education on how to do a SSE;44 and 2) the establishment that skin cancer survivors are to receive regular TBSEs performed by physicians. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Over 3 million new cases of skin cancer are diagnosed in the US annually. Melanoma, a subtype of skin cancer that can be fatal if the disease is not detected and treated at an early stage, is the most common cancer for those aged 25-29 years and the second most common cancer in adolescents and young adults aged 15-29 years. The primary carcinogen for the genesis of skin cancers is ultraviolet light from solar radiation and tanning beds. In spite of massive health campaigns to raise public awareness on ultraviolet radiation, sun-protective practices still fall behind. A plausible explanation is the lack of behavioral change in the populations at risk; in this review article, we examine sun-protective behavior in the four high-risk skin cancer groups: skin cancer survivors, individuals with a family history of melanoma, individuals with physical characteristics associated with skin cancer risk, and organ transplantation patients. Findings in the literature demonstrate that increased knowledge and awareness does not consequently translate into behavioral changes in practice. Behavior can differ as a result of different attitudes and beliefs, depending on the population at risk. Thus, intervention should be tailored to the population targeted. A multidisciplinary health team providing consultation and education is required to influence these much needed changes.
Psychology Research and Behavior Management 12/2013; 7:9-18. DOI:10.2147/PRBM.S40457
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background: A major goal of predictive genetic testing for melanoma is to promote early detection to reduce mortality. This study evaluated the long-term impact of melanoma genetic test reporting and counseling on screening adherence. Methods: This study assessed adherence to recommendations for annual total body skin examinations (TBSEs) and monthly skin selfexaminations (SSEs) among 37 members of Utah CDKN2A/p16 kindreds (10 unaffected carriers, 11 affected carriers, 16 unaffected noncarriers; response rate=64.9% of eligible participants). Results: Two years following test reporting, adherence to annual TBSE among unaffected carriers increased from 40% to 70%. However, unaffected noncarriers' adherence decreased from 56% to 13%. Affected carriers reported TBSEs at both assessments (91% and 82%, respectively). Monthly SSE frequency remained highly variable in all patient groups: at 2 years, 29.7% reported monthly SSEs, 27.0% reported more frequent self-examinations, and 43.2% reported underscreening. However, SSE quality improved significantly: participants checked more body sites at 2 years than at baseline, especially feet, shoulders, legs, and genitals. Perceived logistic barriers to TBSEs (e.g., expensive, inconvenient) and SSEs (hard to remember, time-consuming) predicted lower adherence. Conclusions: Unaffected carriers reported increased TBSE adherence and thoroughness of SSEs 2 years following melanoma genetic test reporting, suggesting clinical benefit in this modest sample. Unaffected noncarriers reported comparable gains in SSE thoroughness, but decreased TBSEs. Impact: Melanoma genetic counseling and test reporting may improve adherence among unaffected carrier members of p16 families. Further interventions to reduce logistic barriers and to promote continued screening adherence among unaffected noncarrier family members may be needed.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.