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

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Journal for Equity in Health
Published in: International Journal for Equity in Health 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research

Non-attendance of mammographic screening: the roles of age and municipality in a population-based Swedish sample

Authors: Maria Norfjord Zidar, Peter Larm, Per Tillgren, Sharareh Akhavan

Published in: International Journal for Equity in Health | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Inequality in health and health care is increasing in Sweden. Contributing to widening gaps are various factors that can be assessed by determinants, such as age, educational level, occupation, living area and country of birth. A health care service that can be used as an indicator of health inequality in Sweden is mammographic screening. The non-attendance rate is between 13 and 31 %, while the average is about 20 %. This study aims to shed light on three associations: between municipality and non-attendance, between age and non-attendance, and the interaction of municipality of residence and age in relation to non-attendance.

Methods

The study is based on data from the register that identifies attenders and non-attenders of mammographic screening in a Swedish county, namely the Radiological Information System (RIS). Further, in order to provide a socio-demographic profile of the county’s municipalities, aggregated data for women in the age range 40–74 in 2012 were retrieved from Statistics Sweden (SCB), the Public Health Agency of Sweden, the National Board of Health and Welfare, and the Swedish Social Insurance Agency. The sample consisted of 52,541 women. Analysis conducted of the individual data were multivariate logistic regressions, and pairwise chi-square tests.

Results

The results show that age and municipality of residence associated with non-attendance of mammographic screening. Municipality of residence has a greater impact on non-attendance among women in the age group 70 to 74. For most of the age categories there were differences between the municipalities in regard to non-attendance to mammographic screening.

Conclusions

Age and municipality of residence affect attendance of mammographic screening. Since there is one sole and pre-selected mammographic screening facility in the county, distance to the screening facility may serve as one explanation to non-attendance which is a determinant of inequity. From an equity perspective, lack of equal access to health and health care influences facility utilization.
Literature
1.
Whitehead M, Dahlgren G. Levelling up (part 1): a discussion paper on European strategies for tackling social inequities in health. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2006.
2.
Socialstyrelsen [The National Board of Health and Welfare]. Screening för bröstcancer. Rekommendation och bedömningsunderlag Remissversion. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen; 2013.
3.
4.
Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, et al. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1. 0, Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2013. Last accessed April 2014.
5.
Socialstyrelsen [The National Board of Health and Welfare]. Official statistics of Sweden Statistics–Health and Medical Care Cancer Incidence in Sweden 2011. Stockholm. 2012.
6.
Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK, Fryback DG, Clarke L, Zelen M, et al. Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:1784–92.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Nyström L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J, Nordenskjöld B, Rutqvist LE. Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet. 2002;359:909–19.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet. 2012;380:1778.CrossRef
9.
Cancerfonden [The Swedish Cancer Society]. Cancerfondens utredning om cancerprevention. Övergripande slutsatser, kunskapsunderlag och angelägna forskningsområden. Stockholm: Cancerfonden; 2004.
10.
Feig SA. Screening mammography: a successful public health initiative. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2006;20:125–33.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Socialstyrelsen [The National Board of Health and Welfare]. Värdet av populationsbaserad screening för bröstcancer. Stockholm. 2013.
12.
Dahlgren G, Whitehead M. European strategies for tackling social inequities in health: levelling up, Part 2. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2007.
13.
Jensen LF, Pedersen AF, Andersen B, Vedsted P. Identifying specific non-attending groups in breast cancer screening-population-based registry study of participation and socio-demography. BMC Cancer. 2012;12:518.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
14.
Engelman KK, Hawley DB, Gazaway R, Mosier MC, Ahluwalia JS, Ellerbeck EF. Impact of geographic barriers on the utilization of mammograms by older rural women. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002;50:62–8.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Siahpush M, Singh GK. Sociodemographic variations in breast cancer screening behavior among Australian women: results from the 1995 National Health Survey. Prev Med. 1995;2002(35):174–80.
16.
Rahman S, Price JH, Dignan M, Rahman S, Lindquist PS, Jordan TR. Access to mammography facilities and detection of breast cancer by screening mammography: a GIS approach. Int J Canc Prev. 2009;2:403.PubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Bulliard J-L, De Landtsheer J-P, Levi F. Profile of women not attending in the Swiss Mammography Screening Pilot Programme. Breast. 2004;13:284–9.PubMedCrossRef
18.
19.
Leung J, McKenzie S, Martin J, McLaughlin D. Effect of rurality on screening for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing mammography. Rural Remote Health. 2014;14:0.62–60.89.
20.
Maheswaran R, Pearson T, Jordan H, Black D. Socioeconomic deprivation, travel distance, location of service, and uptake of breast cancer screening in North Derbyshire, UK. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006;60:208–12.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
Linsell L, Forbes LJL, Patnick J, Wardle J, Austoker J, Ramirez AJ. Women’s preferences for the delivery of the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme: a cross-sectional survey. J Med Screen. 2010;17:176.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Jensen LF, Pedersen AF, Andersen B, Fenger-Grøn M, Vedsted P. Distance to screening site and non-participation in screening for breast cancer: a population-based study. J Public Health. 2014;36:292–9.CrossRef
23.
Stark C, Reay L, Shiroyama C. The effect of access factors on breast screening attendance on two Scottish islands. Health Bull (Edinb). 1997;55:316–21.
24.
Hyndman JCG, Holman CDJ, Dawes VP. Effect of distance and social disadvantage on the response to invitations to attend mammography screening. J Med Screen. 2000;7:141–5.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Zackrisson S, Andersson I, Manjer J, Janzon L. Non-attendance in breast cancer screening is associated with unfavourable socio-economic circumstances and advanced carcinoma. Int J Cancer. 2004;108:754–60.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Hellquist BN, Duffy SW, Abdsaleh S, Björneld L, Bordás P, Tabar L, et al. Effectiveness of population-based service screening with mammography for women ages 40 to 49 years. Cancer. 2011;117:714–22.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Jonsson H, Bordás P, Wallin H, Nyström L, Lenner P. Service screening with mammography in Northern Sweden: effects on breast cancer mortality–an update. J Med Screen. 2007;14:87–93.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Swedish Organised Service Screening Evaluation Group. Reduction in breast cancer mortality from organized service screening with mammography: 1. Further confirmation with extended data. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2006;15:45–51.CrossRef
29.
Lagerlund M, Sontrop JM, Zackrisson S. Psychosocial factors and attendance at a population-based mammography screening program in a cohort of Swedish women. BMC Womens Health. 2014;14:33.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
30.
Lagerlund M, Maxwell AE, Bastani R, Thurfjell E, Ekbom A, Lambe M. Sociodemographic predictors of non-attendance at invitational mammography screening–a population-based register study (Sweden). Cancer Causes Control. 2002;13:73–82.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Zackrisson S, Lindström M, Moghaddassi M, Andersson I, Janzon L. Social predictors of non-attendance in an urban mammographic screening programme: a multilevel analysis. Scand J Public Health. 2007;35:548–54.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Johansson I, Berterö CM. Getting no respect: barriers to mammography for a group of Swedish women. Health Care Women Int. 2003;24:8.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Lagerlund M, Hedin A, Sparén P, Thurfjell E, Lambe M. Attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge as predictors of nonattendance in a Swedish population-based mammography screening program. Prev Med. 2000;31:417–28.PubMedCrossRef
34.
35.
Jordbruksverket [Swedish Board of Agriculture]. Så gjorde vi Allt om landet. Jönköping. 2013.
36.
37.
38.
Folkhälsomyndigheten [Public Health Agency of Sweden]. Definitioner, kommentarer och källor Folkhälsodata och FolkhälsoAtlas. Stockholm: Folkhälsomyndigheten; 2014.
39.
40.
Statistiska Centralbyrån [Statistics Sweden]. MIS SUN 2000. Stockholm: Statistiska Centralbyrån; 2000.
41.
42.
43.
44.
Rahman SM, Dignan MB, Shelton BJ. Factors influencing adherence to guidelines for screening mammography among women aged 40 years and older. Ethn Dis. 2003;13:477.PubMedPubMedCentral
45.
Huang B, Dignan M, Han D, Johnson O. Does distance matter? Distance to mammography facilities and stage at diagnosis of breast cancer in Kentucky. J Rural Health. 2009;25:366–71.PubMedCrossRef
46.
47.
Dahlgren G, Whitehead M. Policies and strategies to promote social equity in health. 1991. Stockholm: Institute for Policy Studies; 2007.
48.
Whitehead M, Dahlgren G. Concepts and principles for tackling social inequities in health: Levelling up Part 1. World Health Organization: Studies on social and economic determinants of population health. 2006. p. 2.
49.
Jackson MC, Davis WW, Waldron W, McNeel TS, Pfeiffer R, Breen N. Impact of geography on mammography use in California. Cancer Causes Control. 2009;20:1339–53.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Doescher MP, Jackson JE. Trends in cervical and breast cancer screening practices among women in rural and urban areas of the United States. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2009;15:200–9.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Samhällsbyggnadsenheten. Bostadsmarknadsanalys 2014 Västmanlands län. Västerås. 2014.
52.
Elkin EB, Ishill NM, Snow JG, Panageas KS, Bach PB, Liberman L, et al. Geographic access and the use of screening mammography. Med Care. 2010;48:349–56.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
53.
Statistiska Centralbyrån [Statistics Sweden]. The future population of Sweden 2012–2060. Stockholm: Statistiska Centralbyrån; 2012.
54.
van Schoor G, Moss SM, Otten JD, Donders R, Paap E, den Heeten GJ, et al. Effective biennial mammographic screening in women aged 40–49. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:3137–40.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Hendrick RE, Smith RA, Rutledge JH, Smart CR. Benefit of screening mammography in women aged 40–49: a new meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997;1997:87–92.
56.
Independent UK Panel. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet. 2012;380:1778.CrossRef
57.
Kerlikowske K. Efficacy of screening mammography among women aged 40 to 49 years and 50 to 69 years: comparison of relative and absolute benefit. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997;1997:79–86.
58.
59.
Malmgren JA, Parikh J, Atwood MK, Kaplan HG. Improved prognosis of women aged 75 and older with mammography-detected breast cancer. Radiology. 2014;273:686–94.PubMedCrossRef
60.
61.
Cancerfonden. Cancerfondsrapporten 2014. Stockholm. 2014.
62.
Rolnick J. Aggregate health data in the United States: steps toward a public good. Health Informatics J. 2013;19:137–51.PubMedCrossRef
63.
Metadata
Title
Non-attendance of mammographic screening: the roles of age and municipality in a population-based Swedish sample
Authors
Maria Norfjord Zidar
Peter Larm
Per Tillgren
Sharareh Akhavan
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1475-9276
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-015-0291-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

International Journal for Equity in Health 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research

The public health impact of economic fluctuations in a Latin American country: mortality and the business cycle in Colombia in the period 1980–2010

Research Article

Urban-rural inequality regarding drug prescriptions in primary care facilities – a pre-post comparison of the National Essential Medicines Scheme of China

Research

Cultural competency training of GP Registrars-exploring the views of GP Supervisors

Research

Primary care quality between Traditional Tibetan Medicine and Western Medicine Hospitals: a pilot assessment in Tibet

Research Article

Usual source of care and the quality of primary care: a survey of patients in Guangdong province, China

Research

Employment status and mental health care use in times of economic contraction: a repeated cross-sectional study in Europe, using a three-level model