Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Do Appalachian Women Attending a Mobile Mammography Program Differ from Those Visiting a Stationary Mammography Facility?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Community Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To compare the characteristics (demographic, access to care, health-related behavioral, self and family medical history, psychosocial) of women aged 40 years and above who utilize a mobile mammography unit with those women aged 40 years and above who obtain mammography screening at a stationary facility. A cross-sectional study design was used with participant cohorts comprised of women age 40 years and above throughout West Virginia (WV) who utilized mobile mammography unit to get mammogram and those who had mammography screening at the stationary facility and completed the Mammography Screening and Preventive Care Survey. A total of 1,161 women who utilized the mobile mammography unit and 1,104 women who utilized stationary facility were included in the analysis. In logistic regression after adjusting for all the variables, women who utilized mobile mammography unit were more likely to be in age group 40–49, with lower income, with no health insurance coverage, not visit doctor or obstetrician/gynecologist (OB/GYN) in the past year, not adherent to clinical breast exam and mammography screening guidelines, with lower perceived five-year risk of developing breast cancer and with high knowledge about mammography screening. Women who utilize mobile unit are not adherent to mammography screening guidelines thereby suggesting that the mobile mammography unit is indeed reaching a rural vulnerable population who may not routinely access preventive health services. Financial and insurance constraints, as well as access to medical care, restricted WV women from receiving mammography screening from the stationary screening facilities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nelson, H.D., Tyne, K., Naik, A., et al. (2009). Screening for breast cancer: An update for the U.S. preventive services task force. Annals of internal medicine, 151(10), 727–37. W237-42.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Tabar, L., Yen, M. F., Vitak, B., Chen, H. H., Smith, R. A., & Duffy, S. W. (2003). Mammography service screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. Lancet, 361(9367), 1405–1410.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fletcher, S. W., & Elmore, J. G. (2003). Clinical practice: mammographic screening for breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 348, 1672–1680.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Nyström, L., Andersson, I., Bjurstam, N., Frisell, J., Nordenskjold, B., & Rutqvist, L. E. (2002). Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet, 359(9310), 909–919.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Smith-Bindman, R., Kerlikowske, K., Gebretsadik, T., & Newman, J. (2000). Is screening mammography effective in elderly women? American Journal of Medicine, 108, 112–119.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Taber, L., & Dean, P. B. (2003). Mammography and breast cancer: The new era. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 82, 319–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hellquist, B. N., Duffy, S. W., Abdsaleh, S., et al. (2011). Effectiveness of population-based service screening with mammography for women ages 40–49 years: Evaluation of the Swedish Mammography Screening in young women (SCRY) cohort. Cancer, 117(4), 714–722.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Health Resource and Services Administration (HRSA). (2009). List of Rural Counties and Designated Eligible Census Tracts in Metropolitan Counties, 2009. Available at ftp://hrsa.gov/ruralhealth/eligibility2005.pdf Accessed 7 Feb 2013.

  9. Health Resource and Services Administration (HRSA). (2010). West Virginia Needs Assessment 2010. US Department of Health and Human Services, 2010. Available at http://www.wvochs.org/dr/shortageareas.aspx Accessed 7 Feb 2013.

  10. U.S. Census Bureau, 2010. Persons 25 years old and over with a bachelor’s degree or more. (2008). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2010/ranks/rank19.html Accessed 7 Feb 2013.

  11. U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). Persons below the poverty level, 2008. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available at http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2010/ranks/rank34.html Accessed 7 Feb 2013.

  12. Kaiser State Health Facts. (2009). Overweight and obesity rates for adults by sex, 2009. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation. Available at http://www.statehealthfacts.org Accessed 7 Feb 2013.

  13. Kaiser State Health Facts. (2008). Percent of adults who smoke by sex, 2008. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation. Available at http://www.statehealthfacts.org Accessed 7 Feb 2013.

  14. Wingo, P. A., Tucker, T. C., Jamison, P. M., et al. (2007). Cancer in Appalachia, 2001–2003. Cancer, 112, 181–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lengerich, E. J., Tucker, T. C., Powell, R. K., et al. (2005). Cancer incidence in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia: Disparities in Appalachia. Journal of Rural Health, 21(1), 39–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lengerich, E. J., Chase, G. A., Beiler, J., & Darnell, M. (2006). Increased risk of unknown stage cancer from residence in a rural area: Health disparities with poverty and minority status (p. 2006). Hershey: Pennsylvania State University and the Penn State Cancer Institute, Department of Health Evaluation Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  17. State Cancer Profiles. (2010). Incidence and mortality rate reports for West Virginia by county. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. Available at http://statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov/ Accessed 7 Feb 2013.

  18. United States Cancer Statistics. (2010). Rankings by state: 2006, male and female, all cancer sites combined. Atlanta, GA: Centers for disease control and prevention (CDC) Available at http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/uscs/ Accessed 7 Feb 2013.

  19. United States Cancer Statistics. (2010). State versus national rates: 2006, female, West Virginia. Atlanta, GA: Centers for disease control and prevention (CDC) Available at http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/uscs/ Accessed 7 Feb 2013.

  20. Khanna, R., Bhanegaonkar, A., Colsher, P., Madhavan, S., & Halverson, J. (2009). Breast cancer screening, incidence and mortality in West Virginia (pp. 25–32). Special CME Issue: West Virginia Medical Journal.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kaiser State Health Facts (2010). Percent of women age 40 and older who report having had a mammogram within the last 2 years, 2008. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation. Available at http://statehealthfacts.org Accessed 7 Feb 2013.

  22. Bhanegaonkar, A., Madhavan, S., Khanna, R., & Remick, S. C. (2012). Declining mammography screening in a State Medicaid Fee-for-Service Program: 1999–2008. Journal of Women’s Health, 21(8), 821–829.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. DeBruhl, N. D., Bassett, L. W., Jessop, N. W., & Mason, A. M. (1996). Mobile mammography: Results from a national survey. Radiology, 201(2), 433–437.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Vyas, A., Madhavan, S., Lemasters, T., et al. (2012). Factors influencing adherence to mammography screening guidelines in Appalachian Women participating in a mobile mammography program. Journal of Community Health, 37(3), 632–646.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. (2002). Screening for breast cancer: recommendations and rationale. Annals of Internal Medicine, 137(5), 344–346.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hirsch, B. R., & Lyman, G. H. (2011). Breast cancer screening with mammography. Current Oncology Reports, 13, 63–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Smith, R.A., Cokkinides, V., Brawley, O. (2012). Cancer screening in the United States, 2012: A review of current American Cancer Society Guidelines and current issues in cancer screening. CA:A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 62, 129–142.

    Google Scholar 

  28. United States Department of Health and Human Services. (2010). Healthy people 2010: Understanding and improving health. Washington DC: US department of Health and Human Services.

    Google Scholar 

  29. National Cancer Institute (2010). State cancer profiles screening and risk factors report 2010. Available at http://progressreport.cancer.gov/doc_detail.asp?pid=1&did=2009&chid=92&coid=916&mid= Accessed 7 Feb 2013.

  30. Reuben, D. B., Bassett, L. W., Hirsch, S. H., Jackson, C. A., & Bastani, R. (2002). A randomized clinical trial to assess the benefit of offering on-site mobile mammography in addition to health education for older women. American Journal of Roentgenology, 179, 1509–1514.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Derose, K. P., Duan, N., & Fox, S. A. (2002). Women’s receptivity to church-based mobile mammography. Journal of Health Care for Poor and Underserved, 13(2), 199–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research study is partially funded by Susan G. Komen For the Cure, Claude Worthington Benedum Foundation, and AHRQ Grant # R24HS018622-02.

Conflict of intrests

No competing financial interests exist.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pharmaceutical Systems and Policy, School of Pharmacy, Robert C. Byrd Health Sciences Center (North), West Virginia University, P.O. Box 9510, Morgantown, WV, 26506-9510, USA

    Ami Vyas, Suresh Madhavan & Kimberly Kelly

  2. Mary Babb Randolph Cancer Center, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, 26506, USA

    Kimberly Kelly & Scot Remick

  3. Department of Psychology, West Virginia University, 1218 Life Sciences Building, PO Box 6040, Morgantown, WV, 26506, USA

    Aaron Metzger

  4. Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, West Virginia University, PO Box 9235, Morgantown, WV, 26506, USA

    Judith Schreiman

Authors
  1. Ami Vyas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Suresh Madhavan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kimberly Kelly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Aaron Metzger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Judith Schreiman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Scot Remick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ami Vyas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vyas, A., Madhavan, S., Kelly, K. et al. Do Appalachian Women Attending a Mobile Mammography Program Differ from Those Visiting a Stationary Mammography Facility?. J Community Health 38, 698–706 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-013-9667-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-013-9667-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation