» Articles » PMID: 35705780

Barriers and Facilitators to Participation in Health Screening: an Umbrella Review Across Conditions

Overview
Journal Prev Sci
Specialty Science
Date 2022 Jun 15
PMID 35705780
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Screening is an essential prevention practice for a number of health conditions. However, screening coverage remains generally low. Studies that investigate determinants of screening participation are becoming more common, but oftentimes investigate screening for health conditions in an individualized rather than integrated fashion. In routine clinical practice, however, healthcare professionals are often confronted with situations in which several screening procedures are recommended for the same patient. The consideration of their common determinants may support a more integrated screening approach. The objectives of this umbrella review were therefore to examine: 1) the determinants (barriers and facilitators) that have been identified in relation to recommended health screening procedures; and 2) the modifiable determinants (in primary care) common across health conditions or specific to individual procedures. Results were presented through a narrative synthesis. PubMed, PsycInfo and Cochrane were searched up to January 2022. Systematic reviews reporting determinants of participation in health screening procedures with grade A or B recommendation according to the US Preventive Services Task Force were included. A total of 85 systematic reviews were included, most which contained both qualitative and quantitative studies on determinants that describe individual factors (961 occurrences), social factors (113 occurrences, healthcare professional factors (149 occurrences), health system factors (105 occurrences) and screening procedure factors (99 occurrences). The most studied screening procedures concerned cervical cancer/human papillomavirus (n = 33), breast cancer (n = 28), colorectal cancer (n = 25) and the human immunodeficiency virus (n = 12). Other conditions have been under-studied (e.g. cardiovascular problems, lung cancer, syphilis). The individual domain, including determinants such as knowledge, beliefs and emotions, was the most covered across health conditions. Healthcare professional's recommendations and the quality of patient-provider communication were identified to have a strong influence on screening participation in most conditions. The other three domains included determinants which were more specific to a condition or a population. Various determinants modifiable in primary care were found in the individual domain and in the health system, healthcare professional and screening procedure domains. Quality was assessed as low for most systematic reviews included. The identification of various modifiable determinants common across conditions highlights the potential of an integrated screening participation approach. Interventions may address common determinants in a broader person-centred framework within which tailoring to specific procedures or populations can be considered. This approach needs to be explored in intervention studies. The systematic review registration is PROSPERO CRD42019126709.

Citing Articles

"If diagnosed early, you will be stressed and die…" drivers for breast cancer screening services uptake among women in Dar es Salaam.

Sirili N, Msami K, Ruwaichi T, Nyamle N PLOS Glob Public Health. 2024; 4(11):e0003390.

PMID: 39495737 PMC: 11534240. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0003390.


Increasing coverage in cervical and colorectal cancer screening by leveraging attendance at breast cancer screening: A cluster-randomised, crossover trial.

Helgestad A, Larsen M, Njor S, Tranberg M, Petersen L, Andersen B PLoS Med. 2024; 21(8):e1004431.

PMID: 39137185 PMC: 11321549. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004431.


Association between Socioecological Status, Nutrient Intake, and Cancer Screening Behaviors in Adults Aged 40 and Over: Insights from the Eighth Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES, 2019).

Jeong S, Choi Y Nutrients. 2024; 16(7).

PMID: 38613081 PMC: 11013844. DOI: 10.3390/nu16071048.


Self-sampling tools to increase cancer screening among underserved patients: a pilot randomized controlled trial.

Moss J, Entenman J, Stoltzfus K, Liao J, Onega T, Reiter P JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2023; 8(1).

PMID: 38060284 PMC: 10868381. DOI: 10.1093/jncics/pkad103.


The Practice and Willingness of Women Towards Opportunistic Screening for Breast and Cervical Cancers in Sichuan Province, China: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Li H, Huang M, Yang Y, Tang J, Ye Y Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2023; 16:169-183.

PMID: 36785645 PMC: 9921511. DOI: 10.2147/RMHP.S391534.


References
1.
Ackerson K, Preston S . A decision theory perspective on why women do or do not decide to have cancer screening: systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2009; 65(6):1130-40. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.04981.x. View

2.
Adams L, Richmond J, Corbie-Smith G, Powell W . Medical Mistrust and Colorectal Cancer Screening Among African Americans. J Community Health. 2017; 42(5):1044-1061. PMC: 5654700. DOI: 10.1007/s10900-017-0339-2. View

3.
Aidalina M, Syed Mohamed A . The uptake of Mammogram screening in Malaysia and its associated factors: A systematic review. Med J Malaysia. 2018; 73(4):202-211. View

4.
Ait Ouakrim D, Lockett T, Boussioutas A, Keogh L, Flander L, Hopper J . Screening participation predictors for people at familial risk of colorectal cancer: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2013; 44(5):496-506. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2013.01.022. View

5.
Alam Z, Hanjani L, Dean J, Janda M . Cervical Cancer Screening Among Immigrant Women Residing in Australia: A Systematic Review. Asia Pac J Public Health. 2021; 33(8):816-827. DOI: 10.1177/10105395211006600. View