No abstract

Cancer screening participation shows a strong, graded association with socioeconomic status (SES) not only in countries such as the United States, where insurance status can be a barrier for lower income groups, but also in the United Kingdom, where the National Health Service provides all health care to residents, including screening, for free. Traditionally, the literature on socioeconomic inequalities has focused on upstream factors, but more proximal (downstream) influences on screening participation also need to be examined, particularly those that address the graded nature of the association rather than focusing specifically on underserved groups. This review offers a framework that links some of the components and corollaries of SES (life stress, educational opportunities, illness experience) to known psychosocial determinants of screening uptake (beliefs about the value of early detection, fatalistic beliefs about cancer, self-efficacy). The aim is to explain why individuals from lower SES backgrounds perceive cancer screening tests as more threatening, more difficult to accomplish, and less beneficial. A better understanding of the mechanisms through which lower SES causes negative attitudes toward screening could facilitate the development of intervention strategies to reduce screening inequalities.

PurposeThe study aim was to develop a mobile application (app) supported by user preferences to optimise self-management of arm and shoulder exercises for upper-limb dysfunction (ULD) after breast cancer treatment.MethodsFocus groups with breast cancer patients were held to identify user needs and requirements. Behaviour change techniques were explored by researchers and discussed during the focus groups. Concepts for content were identified by thematic analysis. A rapid review was conducted to inform the exercise programme. Preliminary testing was carried out to obtain user feedback from breast cancer patients who used the app for 8 weeks post surgery.ResultsBreast cancer patients’ experiences with ULD and exercise advice and routines varied widely. They identified and prioritised several app features: tailored information, video demonstrations of the exercises, push notifications, and tracking and progress features. An evidence-based programme was developed with a physiotherapist with progressive exercises for passive and active mobilisation, stretching and strengthening. The exercise demonstration videos were filmed with a breast cancer patient. Early user testing demonstrated ease of use, and clear and motivating app content.ConclusionsbWell, a novel app for arm and shoulder exercises, was developed by breast cancer patients, health care professionals and academics. Further research is warranted to confirm its clinical effectiveness.Implications for cancer survivorsMobile health has great potential to provide patients with information specific to their needs. bWell is a promising way to support breast cancer patients with exercise routines after treatment and may improve future self-management of clinical care.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11764-017-0630-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background:Introduction of organised, population-based, colorectal cancer screening in the United Kingdom using the faecal occult blood test (FOBT) has the potential to reduce overall colorectal cancer mortality. However, socio-economic variation in screening participation could exacerbate existing inequalities in mortality.Methods:This study examined FOBT uptake rates in London, England in relation to area-level socio-economic deprivation over the first 30 months of the programme during which 401 197 individuals were sent an FOBT kit. Uptake was defined as return of a completed test kit within 3 months. Area-level deprivation in each postcode sector was indexed with the Townsend Material Deprivation Index. Analyses controlled for area-level household mobility, ethnic diversity and poor health, each of which was associated with lower return rates.Results:The results showed a strong socio-economic gradient in FOBT uptake, which declined from 49% in the least deprived quintile of postcodes to 38% in the middle quintile and 32% in the most deprived quintile. Variation in socio-economic deprivation between sectors accounted for 62% of the variance in return rates, with little attenuation as a result of controlling for ethnic diversity, household mobility or health status.Conclusion:These results highlight the need to understand the causes of socio-economic gradients in screening participation and address barriers that could otherwise increase disparities in colorectal cancer survival.

No abstract

SES differences in CFC contribute to SES differences in the perceived barriers and benefits of screening, which, in turn, contribute to differences in attendance. Interventions that take CFC into account, for example, by emphasizing short-term benefits, could promote equality in screening participation.

Health-risk communications frequently target self-efficacy in order to encourage adaptive responses. Research has also indicated that self-affirmation may be a useful supplementary or alternative intervention technique. This study compared the effects of self-efficacy, self-affirmation and a combination of these techniques for two risk messages. Young British females (N=677) read about ultraviolet light and skin cancer or skin ageing ('photoageing') and were randomly assigned to a single intervention (self-affirmation/self-efficacy), the combined intervention or no intervention. The efficacy intervention led to greater message acceptance and perceived risk in both the cancer and photoageing conditions, while the only main effect of self-affirmation was on acceptance of the photoageing message. However, self-affirmation moderated the effect of efficacy information. For photoageing messages, efficacy information was associated with greater message acceptance only amongst self-affirmed participants, but the opposite occurred for skin cancer messages. Although these findings should be interpreted cautiously, they imply that health promoters should select efficacy information if only one intervention is used but that self-affirmation can influence responsiveness to efficacy interventions for particular messages.

Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening participation is low despite its effectiveness in reducing CRC mortality. Identifying benefits and barriers requires consideration of specific characteristics of screening modalities.