What are the barriers towards cervical cancer screening for vulnerable women? A qualitative comparative analysis of stakeholder perspectives in seven European countries.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to map and compare stakeholders' perceptions of barriers towards cervical cancer screening for vulnerable women in seven European countries. DESIGN: In Collaborative User Boards, stakeholders were invited to participate to identify barriers towards participation in cervical cancer screening. SETTING: The study is nested in the European Union-funded project CBIG-SCREEN which aims to tackle inequity in cervical cancer screening for vulnerable women (www.cbig-screen.eu). Data collection took place in Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Italy, Portugal and Romania. PARTICIPANTS: Participants represented micro-level stakeholders covering representatives of users, that is, vulnerable women, meso-level stakeholders covering healthcare professionals and social workers, and macro-level stakeholders covering programme managers and decision-makers. METHODS: Across the seven countries, 25 meetings in Collaborative User Boards with a duration of 2 hours took place between October 2021 and June 2022. The meetings were video recorded or audio recorded, transcribed and translated into English for a qualitative framework analysis. RESULTS: 120 participants took part in the Collaborative User Boards. Context-specific barriers were related to different healthcare systems and characteristics of vulnerable populations. In Romania and Bulgaria, the lack of a continuous screening effort and lack of ways to identify eligible women were identified as barriers for all women rather than being specific for women in vulnerable situations. The participants in Denmark, Estonia, France, Italy and Portugal identified providers' lack of cultural and social sensitivity towards vulnerable women as barriers. In all countries, vulnerable women's fear, shame and lack of priority to preventive healthcare were identified as psychological barriers. CONCLUSION: The study provides an overview of stakeholders' perceived barriers towards vulnerable women's cervical cancer screening participation in seven European countries. The organisation of healthcare systems and the maturity of screening programmes differ between countries, while vulnerable women's psychological barriers had several similarities.

Vaccine Hesitancy among European Parents-Psychological and Social Factors Influencing the Decision to Vaccinate against HPV: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Due to low adherence to HPV vaccination programs, the European region struggles with vaccination rates lower than 30% among the targeted population. The present report investigated various socio-demographic and psychological factors influencing European parents' hesitancy towards vaccinating their children. METHODS: As of September 2023, four databases were searched. After applying inclusion criteria, all articles comparing psychological and socio-demographic factors in parents who vaccinate or do not vaccinate their children were included. RESULTS: Twenty-five primary publications met the criteria, totaling 385,460 responders, of which 311,803 want to or have already vaccinated their child, and 73,555 do not wish to do so. Immigrant and employment status, religion, age of parents and the child's gender seemed to influence their decision to vaccinate their child. Previous experience with vaccines, perceived safety and efficacy and the mother's previous abnormal CCS results also impacted their decision. The caregivers' education, gender, civil status, number of children, family history of neoplasia or mother's CCS attendance did not influence their hesitancy to vaccine. CONCLUSION: Multiple demographic, social, economic and psychological barriers involved in the parents' hesitancy to vaccinate their children against the HPV virus were highlighted. Specific at-risk categories that need to be targeted with information, education and vaccination campaigns were identified.

Factors influencing human papillomavirus vaccination uptake in European women and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Cervical Cancer (CC) lingers as a severe public health issue due to low vaccination coverage and poor screening addressability. Hence, this systematic review explored psychological factors influencing the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccination uptake in European women. METHODS: As of September 2022, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched to include English studies assessing diverse factors influencing vaccination uptake in European women. Only studies comparing vaccinated with unvaccinated women were included. Quality assessment, publication attrition assessment, and sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Eighteen studies were included, totaling a population of 18,611 participants. Results indicated that knowledge about HPV infection could positively influence vaccination rates with an Odds Ratio (OR) of 1.82 and a confidence interval (CI) between 1.27 and 2.61, showing statistical significance at a Z value of 3.24 with a p-value of 0.001. Neither knowledge about HPV vaccination (OR = 1.39, CI: 0.73-2.65, Z = 1.01, p = 0.31) nor knowledge about CC screening (OR = 1.05, CI: 0.55-1.98, Z = 0,14, p = 0.89) seem to affect vaccination rates. Regardless, intention to undertake CC screening (CCS) showed an OR = 1.68 in favor of the group intending to perform it, with a CI between 1.37 and 2.07, showing statistical significance at a Z = 4.94 and p = 0.00001. Other aspects affecting vaccination uptake were fear of side effects, insufficient information, and belief that chances of being infected are low. CONCLUSIONS: Results demonstrated that diverse aspects could affect the vaccination intent, while personalized interventions focusing on population and country characteristics need to be assembled to mitigate vaccination coverage.

Meta-analyses reveal serum or plasma Interleukin-6 as a biomarker for malignant ovarian neoplasia.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin-6 (IL-6) has been implicated in various malignancies, including ovarian cancer. However, mixed results have been observed regarding IL-6 levels in different ovarian conditions. This meta-analysis was performed to determine IL-6 levels in the peritoneal fluid and peripheral blood among patients with various adnexal masses. METHODS: Most popular English databases were searched using a predefined search formula. All studies comparing IL-6 levels in plasma, serum or peritoneal fluid of patients with benign tumors, ovarian neoplasms, and healthy controls were included based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. RESULTS: 5953 patients from 22 primary publications raging from 1994 to 2021 were included in the meta-analyses. A pooled IL-6 Mean Difference (MD) of 41 pg/mL for malignant tumors compared to benign ones, with a Confidence Interval (CI) between 19.8 and 62.2, a Z-score of 3.79, and statistical significance with a p = 0.0002 was observed. Pooled results for healthy versus benign ovarian conditions showed an MD of 5.45 pg/mL for serum or plasma IL-6 measurements in favor of benign tumors (CI:0.66-10.25, Z = 2.23 and p = 0.03). The analysis showed an MD for IL-6 levels of 19.59 pg/mL for healthy controls versus malignant ovarian tumors. Peritoneal fluid measurements regarding IL-6's levels showed no significant difference between benign or malignant masses. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: Higher levels of plasma or serum IL-6 in ovarian neoplasia patients compared to benign conditions or healthy controls identify IL-6 as a discerning factor between benign or malignant ovarian tumors and a potential biomarker for ovarian malignancy.

Treatment and Prevention of Periprosthetic Capsular Contracture in Breast Surgery With Prosthesis Using Leukotriene Receptor Antagonists: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Capsular contracture (CC) is the most common long-term complication of breast surgery with prosthesis. Leukotriene receptor antagonists (LRAs) have been tested as a potential treatment; however, mixed results have been observed. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to undertake a meta-analysis to clarify the treatment and prophylactic capabilities of LRAs in the management of CC. METHODS: A systematic literature search of the most popular English-language databases was performed to identify relevant primary publications. We included all studies that used the Baker scale to evaluate the treatment and preventive capabilities of LRAs. RESULTS: Six eligible studies were included based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, totalling 2276 breasts, of which 775 did not receive LRAs and 1501 did. Final pooled results showed that LRAs could help manage CC with a risk difference (RD) of -0.38 with a corresponding 95% CI of -0.69 to -0.08, showing statistical significance at a Z value of 2.48, P = 0.01. Subgroup analysis based on the type of drug showed that only montelukast yielded statistical significance (RD = -0.27, 95% CI = -0.51 to -0.03, Z = 2.20, P = 0.03). Zafirlukast did not seem to influence CC. Further subgroup analysis based on treatment timing showed that prophylaxis was ineffective and only treatment for ongoing CC yielded statistically significant improvements. CONCLUSIONS: The current meta-analysis proved that LRAs could be used in the management of CC. Only treatment for ongoing CC showed statistically significant improvements. Montelukast seemed to be more efficient with a safer profile for adverse effects, whereas zafirlukast yielded no statistically significant results.

Health anxiety, perceived risk and perceived control in following recommended preventive measures during early COVID-19 response in Romania.

BACKGROUND: Compliance with government-recommended preventive measures represents a key factor in mitigating the negative consequences of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). AIMS: The study investigated the relation between health anxiety, perceived risk and perceived control as predictors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related anxiety and preventive behaviours (both adaptive and dysfunctional/excessive) during the early pandemic response in Romania. METHOD: Data were collected in April-May 2020, and the sample comprised 236 participants, 192 women, mean age 31.44 (s.d. = 10.30, age range 16-67). RESULTS: Our results showed that health anxiety and perceived control, but not perceived risk predicted adaptive preventive behaviours, whereas dysfunctional behaviours were predicted by health anxiety alone. COVID-19-related anxiety was predicted by health anxiety and perceived risk, with perceived control emerging as a non-significant predictor. Also, we found that the effect of health anxiety on COVID-19-related anxiety was mediated by perceived risk, and that perceived control acted as a moderator in the relation between health anxiety and dysfunctional (but not adaptive) preventive behaviours. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest health anxiety is a significant predictor of COVID-19-related anxiety and preventive behaviours. Also, adaptive, but not dysfunctional, preventive behaviours were additionally predicted by perceived control, pointing to the important role of control and self-efficacy in explaining adherence to recommendations.