This article describes the process and outcome of a needs assessment conducted to guide the development of interventions to increase repeat mammography use among participants in a federally funded cancer screening program. Health behavior theory and data from a phone survey are used to uncover key barriers to repeat mammography use and to identify fruitful intervention approaches for modifying them. Estimates of (a) compliance with mammography guidelines, (b) readiness to adopt regular mammography use, (c) the most common reasons for not being rescreened, and (d) population attributable risks associated with various predictors of repeat mammography use are presented and, with guidance from the transtheoretical model of behavior change, used to make inferences about the type of intervention strategies most appropriate for promoting repeat mammography use in this population.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. American Academy of Family Physicians: Age Charts for Periodic Health Examination. Kansas City, MO, American Academy of Family Physicians, 1994.
2.
2. American Cancer Society: Guidelines for the Cancer-Related Checkup: An Update. Atlanta, GA, American Cancer Society, 1993.
3.
3. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: The Obstetrician-Gynecologist and Primary-Preventive Health Care. Washington, DC, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 1993.
4.
4. Council on Scientific Affairs AMA: Mammographic screening in asymptomatic women aged 40 years and older. JAMA261:2535-2542, 1989.
5.
5. Dodd GD: Screening for breast cancer. Cancer72:1038-1042, 1993.
6.
6. Blackman D: Trends in self-reported use of mammograms (1989-1997) and Papanicolaou tests (1991-1197) — Behavioral risk factor surveillance system. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep48(SS06):1-22, 2000.
7.
7. Champion VL: Relationship of age to mammography compliance. Cancer74:329-335, 1994.
8.
8. Miller AM, Champion LC: Mammography in older women: One-time and three-year adherence to guidelines. Nurs Res45(4):239-245, 1996.
9.
9. Zapka JG, Stoddard A, Maul L, Costanza ME: Interval adherence to mammography screening guidelines. Med Care29:697-707, 1991.
10.
10. Howe HL: Repeat mammography among women over 50 years of age. Am J Prev Med8:182-185, 1992.
11.
11. Lee JR, Vogel VG: Who uses mammography regularly? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev4:901-906, 1995.
12.
12. Rosenstock IM: The health belief model and preventive behavior, in Becker M (ed.): The Health Belief Model and Personal Health Behavior. Thorofare, NJ, Charles B. Slack, 1974, pp. 27-59.
13.
13. Lerman C, Rimer BK, Trock B, Balshem A, Engstrom PF: Factors associated with repeat adherence to breast cancer screening. Prev Med19:279-290, 1990.
14.
14. Marshall G: A comparative study of re-attenders and non-re-attenders for second triennial national breast screening programme appointments. J Public Health Med16(1):79-86, 1994.
15.
15. Rimer BK, Lerman C, Trock B, King E, Engstrom PF: Why do some women get regular mammograms? Am J Prev Med7:69-74, 1991.
16.
16. Taylor VM, Taplin SH, Urban N, White E, Peacock S: Repeat mammography use among women ages 50-75. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev4:409-413, 1995.
17.
17. Fava JL, Velicer WF, Prochaska JO: Applying the transtheoretical model to a representative sample of smokers. Addict Behav20(2):189-203, 1995.
18.
18. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC: Transtheoretical therapy: Toward a more integrative model of change. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice19:276-288, 1982.
19.
19. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC: Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: Toward an integrative model of change. J Consult Clin Psychol51(3):390-395, 1983.
20.
20. Velicer WF, Norman GJ, Fava JL, Prochaska JO: Testing 40 predictions from the transtheoretical model. Addict Behav24(4):455-469, 1999.
21.
21. Velicer WF, Hughes SL, Fava JL, Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC: An empirical typology of subjects within stage of change. Addict Behav20(3):299-320, 1995.
22.
22. Reed GR, Velicer WF, Prochaska JO, Rossi JS, Marcus BH: What makes a good staging algorithm: Examples from regular exercise. Am J Health Promotion12(1):57-66, 1997.
23.
23. Rakowski W, Anderson MR, Stoddard A, Urban N, Rimer BK, Lane DS, et al: Confirmatory analysis of opinions regarding the pros and cons of mammography. Health Psychol16(5):433-441, 1997.
24.
24. Rakowski W, Dube CE, Goldstein MG: Considerations for extending the transtheoretical model of behavior change to screening mammography. Health Educ Res11(1):77-96, 1996.
25.
25. Rakowski W, Ehrich B, Dube CE, Pearlman DN, Goldstein MG: Screening mammography and constructs from the transtheoretical model: Associations using two definitions of the stages-of adoption. Ann Behav Med18(2):91-100, 1996.
26.
26. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC, Norcross JC: In search of how people change: Applications to the addictive behaviors. Am Psychol47(9):1102-1114, 1992.
27.
27. Rakowski W, Dube CE, Marcus BH, Prochaska JO, Velicer WF, Abrams DA: Assessing elements of women’s decision-making about mammography. Health Psychol11:111-118, 1992.
28.
28. Rakowski W, Rimer BK, Bryant SA: Integrating behavior and intention regarding mammography by respondents in the 1990 National Health Interview Survey of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention. Public Health Rep108(5):605-624, 1993.
29.
29. Rakowski W, Fulton JP, Feldman JP: Women’s decision making about mammography: A replication of the relationship between stages of adoption and decisional balance. Health Psychol12(3):209-214, 1993.
30.
30. Prochaska JO, Velicer WF, Rossi JS, Goldstein MG, Marcus BH, Rakowski W, et al: Stages and decisional balance for 12 problem behaviors. Health Psychol13(1):39-46, 1994.
31.
31. Rakowski W, Ehrich B, Goldstein MG, Rimer BK, Pearlman DN, Clark MA, et al: Increasing mammography among women aged 40-74 by use of a stage-matched, tailored intervention. Prev Med27:748-756, 1998.
32.
32. Shah BV, Barnwell BG, Hunt PN, Lavange LM: SUDAAN User’s Manual, Release 7.5. Research Triangle Park, NC, Research Triangle Institute, 1997.
33.
33. Davis TC, Berkel HJ, Arnold CL, Nandy I, Jackson RH, Murphy PW: Intervention to increase mammography utilization in a public hospital. J Gen Intern Med13(4):230-233, 1998.
34.
34. Aiken LS, West SG, Woodward CK, Reno RR, Reynolds KD: Increasing screening mammography in asymptomatic women: Evaluation of a second-generation, theory-based program. Health Psychol13(6):526-538, 1994.
35.
35. Crane LA, Leakey TA, Ehrsam G, Rimer BK, Warnecke RB: Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multiple calls to promote mammography among low-income women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev9(9):923-931, 2000.
36.
36. Flynn BS, Gavin P, Worden JK, Ashikaga T, Gautam S, Carpenter J: Community education programs to promote mammography participation in rural New York state. Prev Med26:102-108, 1997.
37.
37. Janz NK, Schottenfeld D, Doerr KM, Selig SM, Dunn RL, Strawderman M, et al: A two-step intervention to increase mammography among women aged 65 and older. Am J Public Health87(10):1683-1686, 1997.
38.
38. Lauver DR, Kane J: A motivational message, external barriers, and mammography utilization. Cancer Detect Prev23(3):254-264, 1999.
39.
39. Rimer BK, Resch N, King E, Ross E, Lerman C, Boyce A, et al: Multistrategy health education program to increase mammography use among women ages 65 and older. Public Health Rep107(4):369-380, 1992.
40.
40. Saywell RM Jr, Champion VL, Skinner CS, McQuillen D, Martin D, Maraj M: Cost-effectiveness comparison of five interventions to increase mammography screening. Prev Med29(5):374-382, 1999.
41.
41. Sharp DH, Peters TJ, Bartholomew HJ, Shaw A: Breast screening: A randomized controlled trial in UK general practice of three interventions designed to increase uptake. J Epidemiol Community Health50(1):72-76, 1996.
42.
42. Weber BE, Reilly BM: Enhancing mammography use in the inner city: A randomized trial of intensive case management. Arch Intern Med157(2):2345-2349, 1997.
43.
43. Pertz CA, DiClemente CC, Carbonari JP: Doing the right thing at the right time? The interaction of stages and processes of change in successful smoking cessation. Health Psychol15(6):462-468, 1996.
44.
44. Taplin SH, Barlow WE, Ludman E, MacLehos R, Meyer DM, Seger D, et al: Testing reminder and motivational telephone calls to increase screening mammography: A randomized study. J Natl Cancer Inst92(3):233-242, 2000.
45.
45. Bodiya A, Vorias D, Dickson HA: Does telephone contact with a physician’s office staff improve mammogram screening rates? Fam Med31(5):324-326, 1999.
46.
46. Dalessandri KM, Cooper M, Rucker T: Effect of mammography outreach in women veterans. West J Med169(3):150-152, 1998.
47.
47. Wagner TH: The effectiveness of mailed patient reminders on mammography screening: A meta-analysis. Am J Prev Med41(1):64-70, 1998.
48.
48. Simon MS, Gimotty PA, Moncrease A, Dews P, Burack RC: The effect of patient reminders on the use of screening mammography in an urban health department primary care setting. Breast Cancer Res Treat65(1):63-70, 2001.
49.
49. Duan N, Fox SA, Derose KP, Carson S: Maintaining mammography adherence through telephone counseling in a church-based trial. Am J Public Health90(9):1468-1471, 2000.
50.
50. Champion VL, Skinner CS, Foster JL: The effects of standard care counseling or telephone/in-person counseling on beliefs, knowledge and behavior related to mammography screening. Oncol Nurs Forum27(10):1565-1571, 2000.
51.
51. Lipkus IM, Rimer BK, Halabi S, Strigo TS: Can tailored interventions increase mammography use among HMO women? Am J Prev Med18(1):1-10, 2000.
52.
52. Ludman EJ, Curry SJ, Meyer D, Taplin SH: Implementation of outreach telephone counseling to promote mammography participation. Health Educ Behav26(5):689-702, 1999.
53.
53. Rimer BK, Halabi S, Skinner CS, Kaplan EB, Crawford Y, Samsa GP, et al: The short-term impact of tailored mammography decision-making interventions. Patient Educ Counsel43(3):271-287, 2001.
54.
54. Skinner C, Strecher V, Hospers H: Physician recommendations for mammography: Do tailored messages make a difference? Am J Public Health84:43-49, 1994.
55.
55. Skinner CS, Campbell MK, Rimer BK, Curry S, Prochaska JO: How effective is tailored print communication? Ann Behav Med21(290):298, 1999.
56.
56. Orton M, Fitzpatrick R, Fuller A, Mant D, Mlynek C, Thorogood M: Factors affecting women’s response to an invitation to attend for a second breast cancer screening examination. Br J Gen Pract41:320-323, 1991.
57.
57. Johnson MM, Hislop TG, Kan L, Coldman AJ, Lai A: Compliance with the screening mammography program of British Columbia: Will she return? Can J Public Health87(3):176-180, 1996.
58.
58. Bastani R, Kaplan CP, Maxwell AE, Nisenbaum R, Pearce J, Marcus AC: Initial and repeat mammography screening in a low income multi-ethnic population in Los Angeles. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev4:164-167, 1995.
59.
59. Elwood M, McNoe B, Smith T, Bandaranayake M, Doyle TC: Once is enough: Why some women do not continue to participate in a breast cancer screening programme. N Z Med J111(1066):180-183, 1998.
60.
60. National Cancer Institute: Cancer Facts (NIH Pub. No.016.60). Washington, DC, Department of Health and Human Services, 1995.
61.
61. King ES, Rimer BK, Trock B, Balshem A, Engstrom P: How valid are mammography self-reports? Am J Public Health80:1386-1388, 1990.
62.
62. Degnan D, Harris R, Ranney J, Quade D, Earp JA, Gonzales J: Measuring the use of mammography: Two methods compared. Am J Public Health82(10):1386-1388, 1992.
63.
63. Partin MR, Casey-Paal AL, Slater JS, Korn JE: Measuring mammography compliance: Lessons learned from a survival analysis of screening behavior. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev7:681-687, 1998.
64.
64. Suarez L, Goldman DA, Weiss NS: Validity of Pap smear and mammogram self-reports in a low-income Hispanic population. Am J Prev Med11:94-98, 1995.
65.
65. Paskett ED, Tatum CM, Mack DW, Hoen H, Case LD, Velez R: Validation of self-reported breast and cervical cancer screening tests among low-income minority women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev5:721-726, 1996.
66.
66. Etzi S, Lane DS, Grimson R: The use of mammography vans by low-income women: The accuracy of self-reports. Am J Public Health84:107-109, 1994.
67.
67. Zapka JG, Bigelow C, Hurley T, Ford LD, Egelhofer J, Cloud M, et al: Mammography use among sociodemographically diverse women: The accuracy of self-report. Am J Public Health86(1016):1021, 1996.
68.
68. Gordon NP, Hiatt RA, Lampert DI: Concordance of self-reported data and medical record audit for six cancer screening procedures. J Natl Cancer Inst85(7):566-570, 1993.
69.
69. Montan DE, Phillips WR: Cancer screening by primary care physicians: A comparison of rates obtained from physician self-report, patient survey, and chart audit. Am J Public Health85(6):795-800, 1995.
70.
70. Fulton-Kehoe D, Burg MA, Lane D: Are self-reported dates of mammogram accurate? Public Health Rev20:233-240, 1992.
71.
71. Hiatt RA, Perez-Sable EJ, Quesenberry C, Sabogal F, Otero-Sabogal R, McPhee S: Agreement between self-reported early cancer detection practices and medical audits among Hispanic and non-Hispanic white health plan members in Northern California. Prev Med23(278):285, 1995.
72.
72. Yood MU, McCarthy BD, Lee NC, Jacobsen G, Johnson CC: Patterns and characteristics of repeat mammography among women 50 years and older. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev8:595-599, 1999.
