How do nurses and teachers perform breast self-examination: are they reliable sources of information?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Breast cancer is the most common cause of cancer-related deaths among women worldwide. The aim of the present study was to determine and compare knowledge, behavior and attitudes among female nurses and teachers concerning breast self-examination (BSE).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Two-hundred and eighty nine women working in Aydin, Turkey (125 nurses and 164 teachers) were included in the study. The data were collected using a questionnaire designed to measure the knowledge, attitudes and behavior of the groups. Analysis involved percentiles, χ²tests, <it>t </it>tests and factor analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The knowledge of nurses about BSE was higher than that of teachers (81.5% versus 45.1%; p < 0.001). BSE practice parameters (i.e. age groups, indications, frequency) were similar (p > 0.05), whereas skills in performing self-examination were higher in nurses (p < 0.001). Fear of having breast cancer is the most frequent reason for performing BSE. Among nurses, the reasons for failure to perform BSE were the absence of prominent breast problems (82%) and forgetting (56.4%). The teachers who did not perform BSE said that the reasons were lack of knowledge on how to perform self-examination (68.9%) and absence of problems (54%). Both groups had unacceptable technical errors in the performance of BSE.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We conclude that nurses and teachers should be supported with information enabling them to accomplish their roles in the community. To improve BSE practice, it is crucial to coordinate continuous and planned education.</p

Adherence to colorectal cancer screening guidelines in Canada

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To identify correlates of adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines in average-risk Canadians.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>2003 Canadian Community Health Survey Cycle 2.1 respondents who were at least 50 years old, without past or present CRC and living in Ontario, Newfoundland, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia were included. Outcomes, defined according to current CRC screening guidelines, included adherence to: i) fecal occult blood test (FOBT) (in prior 2 years), ii) endoscopy (colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy) (prior 10 years), and iii) adherence to CRC screening guidelines, defined as either (i) or (ii). Generalized estimating equations regression was employed to identify correlates of the study outcomes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 17,498 respondents, 70% were non-adherent CRC screening to guidelines. Specifically, 85% and 79% were non-adherent to FOBT and endoscopy, respectively. Correlates for all outcomes were: having a regular physician (OR = (i) 2.68; (ii) 1.91; (iii) 2.39), getting a flu shot (OR = (i) 1.59; (ii) 1.51; (iii) 1.55), and having a chronic condition (OR = (i) 1.32; (ii) 1.48; (iii) 1.43). Greater physical activity, higher consumption of fruits and vegetables and smoking cessation were each associated with at least 1 outcome. Self-perceived stress was modestly associated with increased odds of adherence to endoscopy and to CRC screening guidelines (OR = (ii) 1.07; (iii) 1.06, respectively).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Healthy lifestyle behaviors and factors that motivate people to seek health care were associated with adherence, implying that invitations for CRC screening should come from sources that are independent of physicians, such as the government, in order to reduce disparities in CRC screening.</p

Cancer incidence and mortality trends in Australian adolescents and young adults, 1982-2007

Background: Increasing incidence and lack of survival improvement in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer have led to increased awareness of the cancer burden in this population. The objective of this study was to describe overall and type-specific cancer incidence and mortality trends among AYAs in Western Australia from 1982-2007.Methods: Age-adjusted incidence and mortality rates were calculated for all malignancies combined and for each of the most common diagnostic groups, using five-year age-specific rates. Joinpoint regression analysis was used to derive annual percentage changes (APC) for incidence and mortality rates.Results: The annual incidence rate for all cancers combined increased in males from 1982 until 2000 (APC = 1.5%, 95%CI: 0.9%; 2.1%) and then plateaued, whilst rates for females remained stable across the study period (APC = -0.1%; 95%CI: -0.2%; 0.4%) across the study period. For males, significant incidence rate increases were observed for germ cell tumors, lymphoblastic leukemia and thyroid cancer. In females, the incidence of Hodgkin's lymphoma, colorectal and breast cancers increased. Significant incidence rate reductions were noted for cervical, central nervous system and lung cancers. Mortality rates for all cancers combined decreased from 1982 to 2005 for both males (APC = -2.6%, 95%CI:-3.3%;-2.0%) and females (APC = -4.6%, 95%CI:-5.1%;-4.1%). With the exception of bone sarcoma and lung cancer in females, mortality rates for specific cancer types decreased significantly for both sexes during the study period.Conclusions: Incidence of certain AYA cancers increased, whilst it decreased for others. Mortality rates decreased for most cancers, with the largest improvement observed for breast carcinomas. Further research is needed to identify the reasons for the increasing incidence of certain cancers. © 2012 Haggar et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

Randomized controlled trial of mailed Nicotine Replacement Therapy to Canadian smokers: study protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Considerable public health efforts are ongoing Canada-wide to reduce the prevalence of smoking in the general population. From 1985 to 2005, smoking rates among adults decreased from 35% to 19%, however, since that time, the prevalence has plateaued at around 18-19%. To continue to reduce the number of smokers at the population level, one option has been to translate interventions that have demonstrated clinical efficacy into population level initiatives. Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) has a considerable clinical research base demonstrating its efficacy and safety and thus public health initiatives in Canada and other countries are distributing NRT widely through the mail. However, one important question remains unanswered - do smoking cessation programs that involve mailed distribution of free NRT work? To answer this question, a randomized controlled trial is required.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>A single blinded, panel survey design with random assignment to an experimental and a control condition will be used in this study. A two-stage recruitment process will be employed, in the context of a general population survey with two follow-ups (8 weeks and 6 months). Random digit dialing of Canadian home telephone numbers will identify households with adult smokers (aged 18+ years) who are willing to take part in a smoking study that involves three interviews, with saliva collection for 3-HC/cotinine ratio measurement at baseline and saliva cotinine verification at 8-week and 6-month follow-ups (N = 3,000). Eligible subjects interested in free NRT will be determined at baseline (N = 1,000) and subsequently randomized into experimental and control conditions to receive versus not receive nicotine patches. The primary hypothesis is that subjects who receive nicotine patches will display significantly higher quit rates (as assessed by 30 day point prevalence of abstinence from tobacco) at 6-month follow-up as compared to subjects who do not receive nicotine patches at baseline.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The findings from the proposed trial are timely and highly relevant as mailed distribution of NRT require considerable resources and there are limited public health dollars available to combat this substantial health concern. In addition, findings from this randomized controlled trial will inform the development of models to engage smokers to quit, incorporating proactive recruitment and the offer of evidence based treatment.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01429129">NCT01429129</a></p

Antioxidants and breast cancer risk- a population-based case-control study in Canada

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The effect of antioxidants on breast cancer is still controversial. Our objective was to assess the association between antioxidants and breast cancer risk in a large population-based case-control study.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study population included 2,362 cases with pathologically confirmed incident breast cancer (866 premenopausal and 1,496 postmenopausal) and 2,462 controls in Canada. Intakes of antioxidants from diet and from supplementation as well as other potential risk factors for breast cancer were collected by a self-reported questionnaire.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Compared with subjects with no supplementation, 10 years or longer supplementation of zinc had multivariable-adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of 0.46 (0.25-0.85) for premenopausal women, while supplementation of 10 years or longer of multiple vitamin, beta-carotene, vitamin C, vitamin E and zinc had multivariable-adjusted ORs (95% CIs) of 0.74 (0.59, 0.92), 0.58 (0.36, 0.95), 0.79 (0.63-0.99), 0.75 (0.58, 0.97), and 0.47 (0.28-0.78), respectively, for postmenopausal women. No significant effect of antioxidants from dietary sources (including beta-carotene, alpha-carotene, lycopene, lutein and zeaxanthin, vitamin C, vitamin E, selenium and zinc) or from supplementation less than 10 years was observed.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study suggests that supplementation of zinc in premenopausal women, and supplementation of multiple vitamin, beta-carotene, vitamin C, vitamin E and zinc in postmenopausal women for 10 or more years may protect women from developing breast cancer. However, we were unable to determine the overall effect of total dose or intake from both diet and supplement.</p

The tobacco industry’s challenges to standardised packaging : A comparative analysis of issue framing in public relations campaigns in four countries

Tobacco industry public relations campaigns have played a key role in challenges to standardised cigarette packaging. This paper presents a comparative analysis of industry campaigns in Australia and the United Kingdom, which have implemented standardised packaging legislation; Canada, where policy has been adopted but not yet implemented; and the Netherlands, which has considered, but not enacted regulation. Campaigns were identified via Google searches, tobacco industry websites, media coverage, government submissions and previous research; analysis focused on issue framing and supporting evidence. Public relations campaigns in all case study countries drew on similar frames - the illicit trade in tobacco products, the encroaching 'nanny state', lack of evidence for the effectiveness of standardised packaging, a slippery slope of regulation, and inherent threats to intellectual property rights. These claims were supported by industry research, front groups and commissioned reports by accountancy firms, but were not with verifiable research. Independent evidence that contradicted industry positions was overlooked. Similarities in structure and content of public relations campaigns in countries that have enacted or considered regulation points to a strategic co-ordinated approach by cigarette manufacturers. Countries considering standardised packaging policy can expect powerful opposition from the tobacco industry. Tobacco control communities and policy makers can learn from previous experience, and share best practise in countering industry arguments

Across-province standardization and comparative analysis of time-to-care intervals for cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A set of consistent, standardized definitions of intervals and populations on which to report across provinces is needed to inform the Provincial/Territorial Deputy Ministries of Health on progress of the Ten-Year Plan to Strengthen Health Care. The objectives of this project were to: 1) identify a set of criteria and variables needed to create comparable measures of important time-to-cancer-care intervals that could be applied across provinces and 2) use the measures to compare time-to-care across participating provinces for lung and colorectal cancer patients diagnosed in 2004.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A broad-based group of stakeholders from each of the three participating cancer agencies was assembled to identify criteria for time-to-care intervals to standardize, evaluate possible intervals and their corresponding start and end time points, and finalize the selection of intervals to pursue. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were identified for the patient population and the selected time points to reduce potential selection bias. The provincial 2004 colorectal and lung cancer data were used to illustrate across-province comparisons for the selected time-to-care intervals.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Criteria identified as critical for time-to-care intervals and corresponding start and end points were: 1) relevant to patients, 2) relevant to clinical care, 3) unequivocally defined, and 4) currently captured consistently across cancer agencies. Time from diagnosis to first radiation or chemotherapy treatment and the smaller components, time from diagnosis to first consult with an oncologist and time from first consult to first radiation or chemotherapy treatment, were the only intervals that met all four criteria. Timeliness of care for the intervals evaluated was similar between the provinces for lung cancer patients but significant differences were found for colorectal cancer patients.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We identified criteria important for selecting time-to-care intervals and appropriate inclusion criteria that were robust across the agencies that did not result in an overly selective sample of patients to be compared. Comparisons of data across three provinces of the selected time-to-care intervals identified several important differences related to treatment and access that require further attention. Expanding this collaboration across Canada would facilitate improvement of and equitable access to quality cancer care at a national level.</p