Predicting reattendance in the second round of the UK National Breast Screening Programme: a prospective 3-year longitudinal analysis

Rutter, D. R.; Calnan, Michael; Field, S.; Vaile, Michael

doi:10.1016/s0960-9776(97)90551-8

Cited by 22 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most of them (75%) said that it was because the previous mammogram had been painful. However, in a prospective British study by Rutter, 23 it was found that first round experiences, collected shortly after the initial screening round, were of only minor importance in predicting future attendance.…”

Section: Influence Of Negative Experiences On Repeat Attendancementioning

confidence: 98%

“…This was also found previously. 23 Most women (>94%) reattended for screening, sometimes even despite negative experiences such as pain, distress, or long distance to the unit. The finding that previous experiences are not related to reattendance contrasts with previous retrospective studies, which have reported that non-attendance was related to negative experiences.…”

Section: -10mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Monitoring women's experiences during three rounds of breast cancer screening: results from a longitudinal study

2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: (a) To monitor experiences of women during three successive rounds of breast screening; (b) to examine the impact of previous experiences (obtained either immediately after the latest mammogram or shortly before the subsequent one) on reattendance; and (c) to examine which factors are associated with the experience of pain and distress during screening. Setting: The Dutch Breast Cancer Screening Programme Methods: 2657 women completed a baseline measurement (response rate 67%) about 8 weeks after they had been invited for an initial mammogram (T 1 ). Actual participation data of these women in the second and third rounds of screening were collected. Follow up questionnaires were sent to subgroups of the sample at different times: shortly before the second screening (T 2 ; response rate 86%), shortly after the second screening (T 3 ; response rate 85%), shortly before the third screening (T 4 ; response rate 80%), and shortly after the third screening (T 5 ; response rate 78%). Results: Most women were satisfied with the first screening round and remained positive about subsequent screens. Although pain and anxiety were not uncommon, only a few (10%-15%) experienced moderate or severe levels of distress or pain. Experiences were relatively stable: women who experienced pain in the first screen were more likely to experience pain in subsequent screens (r values from 0.39 to 0.50). Fear of breast cancer was associated with increased distress related to mammography and, to a lesser extent, with increased pain during the mammography. Evidence was found for a relief effect: women were more positive about their previous screen when asked shortly after this screen, than when asked just before the subsequent one. Previous experiences (obtained either proximally or distally) were only slightly predictive for future attendance. Conclusion: Experiences during mammography are fairly stable. Negative experiences were generally not a reason to drop out of the programme. S tudies in different countries with differently organised breast screening programmes have shown that women who participate in breast cancer screening are in general positive about the course of the breast examination.

show abstract

Section: Influence Of Negative Experiences On Repeat Attendancementioning

confidence: 98%

Section: -10mentioning

confidence: 99%

Monitoring women's experiences during three rounds of breast cancer screening: results from a longitudinal study

2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In most of these studies, beliefs and intentions obtained before the first round of screening have been correlated to actual attendance in second round (Boer and Seydel, 1996;Cockburn et al, 1997;Rutter, 1997Rutter, , 2000. Results have not been consistent.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospective Study on the Determinants of Repeat Attendance and Attendance Patterns in Breast Cancer Screening Using the Theory of Planned Behaviour

Drossaert

Boer

Seydel

2003

Psychology & Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This prospective study, using the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) as a theoretical framework, was carried out to identify the determinants of repeat attendance and attendance patterns in organised breast screening. A group of 2657 women filled out a baseline questionnaire, approximately 8 weeks after having been invited for an initial screening in the Dutch Breast Cancer Screening Programme. Data on actual attendance in second and third screening round were subsequently collected. Personal variables such as family history of breast cancer, breast cancer in someone close and fear of breast cancer were not related to repeat attendance. The TPB variables could explain approximately 17% of the variance in attendance in the second and third round. Maintenance behaviour (consistent attendance vs. dropout) was related to the TPB variables, but the amount of variance explained was only 6%. Initiation of behaviour (consistent refusal vs. delayed attendance) also was related to TPB variables, with a substantially higher amount of explained variance than with maintenance behaviour. Results indicate that the TPB variables are more related to the initiation of screening behaviour than to the maintenance of screening behaviour. Implications of these findings for breast cancer screening are discussed.

show abstract

“…Eleven showed a positive relationship indicating that women who undergo mammographic screening are significantly more likely to be screened again than women who have not been screened; [133][134][135][136][137][138][139][140][141][142][143] two of these papers were prospective. 135,139 Six papers showed no significant differences in mammography use between attenders and nonattenders 122,123,[144][145][146][147] and five papers showed an association between lower rates of attendance and ever having a mammogram.…”

Section: Attendance/reattendancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the 26 papers examining attendance at breast screening, 19 papers reported a positive association between attendance for cervical screening and attendance at future breast screening. 87,116,118,120,132,138,144,151,158,161,162,164,173,191,[247][248][249][250][251] One paper, which examined stages of adoption of screening mammography, found that for the least committed group of women, having had a Pap smear in the past 2 years was associated with attending for breast screening. 191 However, there was no association found for women who were either thinking about being screened or were inconsistently or routinely being screened.…”

Section: Effect Of Cervical Screening On Breast Screening Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of screening on future health-promoting behaviours and health beliefs: a systematic review

Bankhead

Brett²,

Bukach³

et al. 2003

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-UK purchasers will have to pay a small fee for post and packing. For European countries the cost is £2 per monograph and for the rest of the world £3 per monograph.You can order HTA monographs from our Despatch Agents:-fax (with credit card or official purchase order) -post (with credit card or official purchase order or cheque) -phone during office hours (credit card only).Additionally the HTA website allows you either to pay securely by credit card or to print out your order and then post or fax it. Contact details are as follows: Payment methods Paying by chequeIf you pay by cheque, the cheque must be in pounds sterling, made payable to Direct Mail Works Ltd and drawn on a bank with a UK address. Paying by credit cardThe following cards are accepted by phone, fax, post or via the website ordering pages: Delta, Eurocard, Mastercard, Solo, Switch and Visa. We advise against sending credit card details in a plain email. Paying by official purchase orderYou can post or fax these, but they must be from public bodies (i.e. NHS or universities) within the UK. We cannot at present accept purchase orders from commercial companies or from outside the UK. How do I get a copy of HTA on CD?Please use the form on the HTA website (www.hta.ac.uk/htacd.htm). Or contact Direct Mail Works (see contact details above) by email, post, fax or phone. HTA on CD is currently free of charge worldwide.The website also provides information about the HTA Programme and lists the membership of the various committees. HTA NHS R&D HTA ProgrammeT he NHS R&D Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme was set up in 1993 to ensure that high-quality research information on the costs, effectiveness and broader impact of health technologies is produced in the most efficient way for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS.Initially, six HTA panels (pharmaceuticals, acute sector, primary and community care, diagnostics and imaging, population screening, methodology) helped to set the research priorities for the HTA Programme. However, during the past few years there have been a number of changes in and around NHS R&D, such as the establishment of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the creation of three new research programmes: Service Delivery and Organisation (SDO); New and Emerging Applications of Technology (NEAT); and the Methodology Programme.This has meant that the HTA panels can now focus more explicitly on health technologies ('health technologies' are broadly defined to include all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care) rather than settings of care. Therefore the panel structure was replaced in 2000 by three new panels: Pharmaceuticals; Therapeutic Procedures (including devices and operations); and Diagnostic Technologies and Screening.The HTA Programme will continue to commission both primary and secondary research. The HTA Commissioning Board, supported by the National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment (NCCHTA...

show abstract

Predicting reattendance in the second round of the UK National Breast Screening Programme: a prospective 3-year longitudinal analysis

Cited by 22 publications

References 7 publications

Monitoring women's experiences during three rounds of breast cancer screening: results from a longitudinal study

Monitoring women's experiences during three rounds of breast cancer screening: results from a longitudinal study

Prospective Study on the Determinants of Repeat Attendance and Attendance Patterns in Breast Cancer Screening Using the Theory of Planned Behaviour

The impact of screening on future health-promoting behaviours and health beliefs: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About