Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Cancer Causes & Control
Published in: Cancer Causes & Control 3/2011

01-03-2011 | Original paper

A Promotora-administered group education intervention to promote breast and cervical cancer screening in a rural community along the U.S.–Mexico border: a randomized controlled trial

Authors: Tomas Nuño, Maria Elena Martinez, Robin Harris, Francisco García

Published in: Cancer Causes & Control | Issue 3/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Breast cancer is the most common neoplasm among Hispanic women. Cervical cancer has a higher incidence and mortality among Hispanic women compared with non-Hispanic White women.

Objective

To assess the effectiveness of a promotora-administered educational intervention to promote breast and cervical cancer screening among post-reproductive age, medically underserved Hispanic women residing along the U.S.–Mexico border.

Methods

Women age 50 or older were eligible to participate in this intervention study. A total of 381 subjects agreed to participate. Women were randomly assigned into one of two groups, educational intervention or usual care. The primary outcomes were self-reported mammogram and Pap smear screening. Logistic regression analysis was used to compute odds ratios for comparisons between intervention and control groups.

Results

Women in the intervention group were 2.0 times more likely to report having had a mammogram within the last year when compared with the usual care group (95% CI = 1.3–3.1). Likewise, women in the intervention group were 1.5 times more likely to report having a Pap smear within the last year when compared with the usual care group, although this was not statistically significant (95% CI = 0.9–2.6). In a secondary analysis, the intervention suggests a stronger effect on those that had not had a mammogram or Pap smear within the past year at baseline.

Conclusions

A promotora-based educational intervention can be used to increase breast and cervical cancer screening utilization among Hispanic women.
Literature
1.
American Cancer Society (2006) Cancer facts & figures for Hispanics/Latinos 2006–2008. American Cancer Society, Atlanta
2.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly (2002) Invasive cervical cancer among Hispanic and non-Hispanic women–United States, 1992–1999. 51:1067–1070
3.
Coughlin SS, Richards TB, Nasseri K, Weiss NS, Wiggins CL, Saraiya M et al (2008) Cervical cancer incidence in the United States in the US-Mexico border region, 1998–2003. Cancer 113(suppl 10):2964–2973CrossRefPubMed
4.
Healthy Border 2010 (2003) An agenda improving health on the United States-Mexico Border. U.S. Mexico Border Health Commission 2003
5.
Nuño T, Castle PE, Harris RB, Estrada AL, Garcia F (2011) Breast & cervical cancer screening utilization among hispanic women living near the U.S.-Mexico border. J Womens Health (in press)
6.
Suarez L, Nichols D, Brady C (1993) Use of peer role models to increase Pap smear and mammogram screening in Mexican-American and black women. Am J Prev Med 9(5):290–296PubMed
7.
Castro FG, Elder J, Coe K, Tafoya-Barraza H, Moratto S, Campbell N et al (1995) Mobilizing churches for health promotion in Latino communities: Companeros en la Salud. J Natl Cancer Inst 18:127–135
8.
Navarro AM, Senn KL, McNicholas LJ, Kaplan RM, Roppe B, Campo MC (1998) Por La vida model intervention enhances use of cancer screening tests among Latinas. Am J Prev Med 15(1):32–41CrossRefPubMed
9.
Hiatt RA, Pasick RJ, Stewart S, Bloom J, Davis P, Gardiner P et al (2001) Community-based cancer screening for underserved women: design and baseline findings from the breast and cervical cancer intervention study. Prev Med 33(3):190–203CrossRefPubMed
10.
Fernandez-Esquer ME, Espinoza P, Torres I, Ramirez AG, McAlister AL (2003) A Su Salud: a quasi-experimental study among Mexican American Women. Am J Health Behav 27(5):536–545PubMed
11.
Mayo RM, Sherrill WW, Crew L, Watt P, Mayo WW (2004) Connecting rural African American and Hispanic women to cancer education and screening: the Avon Health Connector Project. J Cancer Educ 19(2):123–126CrossRefPubMed
12.
Giarratano G, Bustamante-Forest R, Carter C (2005) A multicultural and multilingual outreach program for cervical and breast cancer screening. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 34(3):395–402CrossRefPubMed
13.
Hansen LK, Feigl P, Modiano MR, Lopez JA, Escobedo Sluder S, Moinpour CM et al (2005) An educational program to increase cervical and breast cancer screening in Hispanic women: a Southwest Oncology Group study. Cancer Nurs 28(1):47–53CrossRefPubMed
14.
Larkey L (2006) Las mujeres saludables: reaching Latinas for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer prevention and screening. J Community Health 31(1):69–77CrossRefPubMed
15.
Ell K, Vourlekis B, Lee P-J, Xie B (2007) Patient navigation and case management following an abnormal mammogram: a randomized clinical trial. Prev Med 44:26–33CrossRefPubMed
16.
Ferrante JM, Chen P-H, Kim S (2007) The effect of patient navigation on time to diagnosis, anxiety, and satisfaction in urban minority women with abnormal mammograms: a randomized controlled trial. J Urban Health 85(1):114–124CrossRefPubMed
17.
18.
Martinez-Donate AP (2009) Using lay health advisors to promote breast and cervical cancer screening among Latinas: a review. Wis Med J 108(5):259–262
19.
U.S. Census Bureau (2000) Summary file 1 (SF 1) and summary file 3 (SF 3)
20.
Bandura A (1986) Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
21.
Bandura A (2004) Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Edu Behav 31(2):143–164CrossRef
22.
Baranowski T, Perry CL, Parcel GS (2002) How individuals, environments, and health behavior interact: social cognitive theory. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Lewis FM (eds) Health behavior and health education: theory, research, and practice, 3rd edn. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp 165–184
23.
Saslow D, Castle PE, Cox JT, Davey DD, Einstein MH, Ferris DG et al (2007) American Cancer Society guidelines for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine use to prevent cervical cancer and its precursors. CA Cancer J Clin 57(1):7–28CrossRefPubMed
24.
Suarez L, Goldman D, Weiss N (1995) Validity of Pap smear and mammogram self-reports in a low-income Hispanic population. Am J Prev Med 1:94–98
25.
Paskett E, Tatum C, Mack D, Hoen H, Case L, Velez R (1996) Validation of self-reported breast and cervical cancer screening tests among low-income minority women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 5:721–726
26.
Caplan LS, McQueen DV, Qualters JR, Leff M, Garrett C, Calonge N (2003) Validity of women’s self-reports of cancer screening test utilization in a managed care population. Cancer Epidem Biom Prev 12:1182–1187
27.
Hunter JB, De Zapien JG, Denman C, Moncada E, Papenfuss M, Wallace D et al (2003) Healthcare access and utilization among women 40 and older at the U.S.-Mexico border: predictors of a routine check-up. J Commun Health 28(5):317–333CrossRef
Metadata
Title
A Promotora-administered group education intervention to promote breast and cervical cancer screening in a rural community along the U.S.–Mexico border: a randomized controlled trial
Authors
Tomas Nuño
Maria Elena Martinez
Robin Harris
Francisco García
Publication date
01-03-2011
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Cancer Causes & Control / Issue 3/2011
Print ISSN: 0957-5243
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7225
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-010-9705-4

Other articles of this Issue 3/2011

Cancer Causes & Control 3/2011 Go to the issue

Original paper

Papillary thyroid cancer incidence rates vary significantly by birthplace in Asian American women

Original paper

Dietary intake of micronutrients and the risk of developing bladder cancer: results from the Belgian case–control study on bladder cancer risk

Original paper

Physical activity, additional breast cancer events, and mortality among early-stage breast cancer survivors: findings from the WHEL Study

Original paper

The associations between statin use and prostate cancer screening, prostate size, high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN), and prostate cancer

Original paper

Coffee consumption and reduced risk of hepatocellular carcinoma: findings from the Singapore Chinese Health Study

Original paper

Has the lung cancer risk from smoking increased over the last fifty years?
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits