Adherence to Cancer Screening Guidelines and Predictors of Improvement Among Participants in the Kansas State Employee Wellness Program

Overview

Journal Prev Chronic Dis

Specialty Public Health

Date 2013 Jul 13

PMID 23845176

Citations 4

Authors

Siu-Kuen Azor Hui

Kimberly K Engelman

Theresa I Shireman

Edward F Ellerbeck

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Employee wellness programs (EWPs) have been used to implement worksite-based cancer prevention and control interventions. However, little is known about whether these programs result in improved adherence to cancer screening guidelines or how participants' characteristics affect subsequent screening. This study was conducted to describe cancer screening behaviors among participants in a state EWP and identify factors associated with screening adherence among those who were initially nonadherent.

Methods: We identified employees and their dependents who completed health risk assessments (HRAs) as part of the Kansas state EWP in both 2008 and 2009. We examined baseline rates of adherence to cancer screening guidelines in 2008 and factors associated with adherence in 2009 among participants who were initially nonadherent.

Results: Of 53,095 eligible participants, 13,222 (25%) participated in the EWP in 2008 and 6,205 (12%) participated in both years. Among the multiyear participants, adherence was high at baseline to screening for breast (92.5%), cervical (91.8%), and colorectal cancer (72.7%). Of participants who were initially nonadherent in 2008, 52.4%, 41.3%, and 33.5%, respectively, became adherent in the following year to breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. Suburban/urban residence and more frequent doctor visits predicted adherence to breast and colorectal cancer screening guidelines.

Conclusion: The effectiveness of EWPs for increasing cancer screening is limited by low HRA participation rates, high rates of adherence to screening at baseline, and failure of nonadherent participants to get screening. Improving overall adherence to cancer screening guidelines among employees will require efforts to increase HRA participation, stronger interventions for nonadherent participants, and better access to screening for rural employees.

Citing Articles

Effectiveness of workplace cancer screening interventions: a systematic review.

Mon H, Robb K, Demou E BMC Cancer. 2024; 24(1):999.

PMID: 39134945 PMC: 11321184. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12649-0.

Evaluation of the association between periodontitis and risk of Parkinson's disease: a nationwide retrospective cohort study.

Jeong E, Park J, Park Y Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):16594.

PMID: 34400731 PMC: 8367946. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-96147-4.

Trends in Cervical Cancer Among Delivery-Related Discharges and its Impact on Maternal-Infant Birth Outcomes (United States, 1998-2009).

Mogos M, Salemi J, Sultan D, Shelton M, Salihu H Open Nurs J. 2016; 9:42-50.

PMID: 26862361 PMC: 4740966. DOI: 10.2174/1874434601509010042.

Changing organizational culture: using the CEO cancer gold standard policy initiatives to promote health and wellness at a school of public health.

Towne Jr S, Anderson K, Smith M, Vollmer Dahlke D, Kellstedt D, Purcell N BMC Public Health. 2015; 15:853.

PMID: 26334296 PMC: 4559178. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-015-2186-3.

References

Goetzel R, Ozminkowski R . The health and cost benefits of work site health-promotion programs. Annu Rev Public Health. 2008; 29:303-23. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.29.020907.090930. View

Soler R, Leeks K, Razi S, Hopkins D, Griffith M, Aten A . A systematic review of selected interventions for worksite health promotion. The assessment of health risks with feedback. Am J Prev Med. 2010; 38(2 Suppl):S237-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2009.10.030. View

Hannon P, Harris J . Interventions to improve cancer screening: opportunities in the workplace. Am J Prev Med. 2008; 35(1 Suppl):S10-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.04.007. View

Paskett E, McLaughlin J, Reiter P, Lehman A, Rhoda D, Katz M . Psychosocial predictors of adherence to risk-appropriate cervical cancer screening guidelines: a cross sectional study of women in Ohio Appalachia participating in the Community Awareness Resources and Education (CARE) project. Prev Med. 2009; 50(1-2):74-80. PMC: 2813897. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.09.001. View

Jackson M, Davis W, Waldron W, McNeel T, Pfeiffer R, Breen N . Impact of geography on mammography use in California. Cancer Causes Control. 2009; 20(8):1339-53. DOI: 10.1007/s10552-009-9355-6. View

Aldana S, Merrill R, Price K, Hardy A, Hager R . Financial impact of a comprehensive multisite workplace health promotion program. Prev Med. 2004; 40(2):131-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.05.008. View

Goetzel R, Ozminkowski R, Bruno J, Rutter K, Isaac F, Wang S . The long-term impact of Johnson & Johnson's Health & Wellness Program on employee health risks. J Occup Environ Med. 2002; 44(5):417-24. DOI: 10.1097/00043764-200205000-00010. View

Price M, Butow P, Charles M, Bullen T, Meiser B, McKinley J . Predictors of breast cancer screening behavior in women with a strong family history of the disease. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010; 124(2):509-19. DOI: 10.1007/s10549-010-0868-1. View

Kizer K, Pelletier K, Fielding J . Work-site health promotion programs and health care reform. West J Med. 1995; 162(5):467-8. PMC: 1022806. View

10.

Glasgow R, McCaul K, Fisher K . Participation in worksite health promotion: a critique of the literature and recommendations for future practice. Health Educ Q. 1993; 20(3):391-408. DOI: 10.1177/109019819302000309. View

11.

Griffith K, McGuire D, Royak-Schaler R, Plowden K, Steinberger E . Influence of family history and preventive health behaviors on colorectal cancer screening in African Americans. Cancer. 2008; 113(2):276-85. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23550. View

12.

McQueen A, Vernon S, Rothman A, Norman G, Myers R, Tilley B . Examining the role of perceived susceptibility on colorectal cancer screening intention and behavior. Ann Behav Med. 2010; 40(2):205-17. PMC: 3161120. DOI: 10.1007/s12160-010-9215-3. View

13.

Gierisch J, ONeill S, Rimer B, DeFrank J, Bowling J, Skinner C . Factors associated with annual-interval mammography for women in their 40s. Cancer Epidemiol. 2009; 33(1):72-8. PMC: 2727566. DOI: 10.1016/j.cdp.2009.03.001. View

14.

Benuzillo J, Jacobs E, Hoffman R, Heigh R, Lance P, Martinez M . Rural-urban differences in colorectal cancer screening capacity in Arizona. J Community Health. 2009; 34(6):523-8. DOI: 10.1007/s10900-009-9185-1. View

15.

Cornfeld M, Schnoll R, Tofani S, Babb J, Miller S, Balshem A . Implementation of a comprehensive cancer control program at the worksite: year one summary report. J Occup Environ Med. 2002; 44(5):398-406. DOI: 10.1097/00043764-200205000-00008. View

16.

Holt C, Shipp M, Eloubeidi M, Clay K, Smith-Janas M, Janas M . Use of focus group data to develop recommendations for demographically segmented colorectal cancer educational strategies. Health Educ Res. 2009; 24(5):876-89. DOI: 10.1093/her/cyp024. View

17.

. Recommendations for worksite-based interventions to improve workers' health. Am J Prev Med. 2010; 38(2 Suppl):S232-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2009.10.033. View

18.

Martin-Lopez R, Hernandez-Barrera V, Lopez de Andres A, Garrido P, de Miguel A, Jimenez Garcia R . Breast and cervical cancer screening in Spain and predictors of adherence. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2010; 19(3):239-45. DOI: 10.1097/CEJ.0b013e3283372125. View

19.

Stein A, Shakour S, Zuidema R . Financial incentives, participation in employer-sponsored health promotion, and changes in employee health and productivity: HealthPlus Health Quotient Program. J Occup Environ Med. 2000; 42(12):1148-55. DOI: 10.1097/00043764-200012000-00005. View

20.

Robroek S, van Lenthe F, van Empelen P, Burdorf A . Determinants of participation in worksite health promotion programmes: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2009; 6:26. PMC: 2698926. DOI: 10.1186/1479-5868-6-26. View