ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Screening is a significant method for cancer control, nevertheless the implementation of non cost-effective screening tests at national level may constitute a major burden to health economics. The purpose of this study was to determine the cancer screening activities of a large sample of the Hellenic population, in a country with opportunistic screening practice. METHODS: A large survey on cancer screening in Greece was organized and conducted by the Panhellenic Association for Continual Medical Research (PACMeR). Screening performance of evidence-based (EB), non-evidence-based (non EB) and of undefined benefit tests was analysed. RESULTS: 7001 individuals were analysed. Eighty-eight percent of males and 93% of females stated that they were interested in cancer screening practices. Gynecological cancer screening was performed in the range of 23-38%. Colorectal cancer screening was rarely performed in both genders (1- 2%), while non-evidence-based tests were regularly performed (urinalysis 50% and chest radiography 15-18%). Full blood count and PSA measurement were widely accepted (over 45% in both genders and 19.5% in males, respectively). Sociodemographic characteristics did not influence the performance of EB tests in males while females' activities were highly influenced by such parameters. CONCLUSION: Opportunistic cancer screening in a primary health care system where national guidelines are missing may cause ambiguous results. Reconsideration of health policy in such cases is mandatory.
Subject(s)
Government Regulation , Health Policy , Health Priorities , Mass Screening/methods , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Primary Health Care , Unnecessary Procedures , Aged , Chi-Square Distribution , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Greece , Health Care Costs , Health Policy/economics , Health Priorities/economics , Health Priorities/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Services Research , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/economics , Mass Screening/legislation & jurisprudence , Middle Aged , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/economics , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/legislation & jurisprudence , Predictive Value of Tests , Primary Health Care/economics , Primary Health Care/legislation & jurisprudence , Surveys and Questionnaires , Unnecessary Procedures/economicsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To estimate cancer screening coverage among a large sample of Greek individuals. METHODS: 7012 adults from 30 Hellenic areas were surveyed. Tests included: faecal occult blood test, sigmoidoscopy,chest X-ray, urine test, testicular examination,trans-rectal ultrasound, full blood count, skin examination,digital rectal examination, PSA, Pap test, mammography,clinical breast examination (CBE), self breast examination and breast ultrasound. RESULTS: Eighty-eight percent of males and 93% of females declared being interested in cancer screening; 37.8% of men and 37.9% of women had had a medical consultation for screening purpose in the previous 2 years. Less than 2%reported having received screening for colorectal cancer or skin malignancies. Screening for cervical cancer, mammography and CBE was reported by 39.6%, 22.8% and 27.9% of females respectively. Twenty percent of males reported screening for prostate cancer. CONCLUSION: The actual opportunistic screening approach presents important deficiencies with displaced priorities in test performance and a low proportion of individuals undergoing recommended tests (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Multicenter Studies as Topic/methods , Health Priorities , Neoplasms/prevention & control , Uterine Neoplasms/diagnosis , Mass Screening/methods , Mass Screening , Attitude to Health , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Greece/epidemiology , Mammography/statistics & numerical data , Mammography , Patient Participation/methods , Patient Participation , Physical Examination/statistics & numerical data , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosisABSTRACT
Genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection is the leading cause of bacterial sexually transmitted disease in industrialised countries, particularly among young people. The consequences of chlamydial infection may involve urethritis, cervicitis, pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancy, tubal factor infertility, epididymitis and prostatitis. In addition, chlamydial infection increases the risk of acquisition of human immunodeficiency virus and has been associated with cervical cancer. Although screening programmes exist in a number of countries, the continuously increasing prevalence of chlamydial infections demonstrates the necessity for health authorities to establish effective screening policies, and the importance of defining a comprehensive European screening policy is emerging.
Subject(s)
Chlamydia Infections/epidemiology , Chlamydia trachomatis , Mass Screening , Chlamydia Infections/diagnosis , DNA, Bacterial/genetics , Europe , Female , Humans , Infertility/prevention & control , Male , Polymerase Chain Reaction , Urine/microbiologyABSTRACT
Cancer is the second cause of death in developed countries. Many efforts to educate the public to more tumor free life-style and screening practice have been therefore adopted. Considering the high costs of diagnostic procedures and educational programs a cancer prevention/screening practice monitoring system is required to reduce costs, to assist health making policy decisions, and to tailor more targeted interventions whenever indicated. We, therefore, realized a computerized data-base able to assist medical personnel in health intervention monitoring and making policy at community level with a focus on the European region. An international medical board provided the translation of medical-related contents in English, French, German, Greek, Italian, Rumanian, Spanish and Turkish. The electronic system recognizes and finds relationships between screening events or secondary prevention tests and various causes of medical examinations (symptoms, diseases, professions, presence and type of health insurance, sex, age, medical history, family history, educational level, knowledge about cancer screening and prevention, patient location, type of community, region of provenance, etc). Due to its multi-language standardized characteristics its application may bridge European countries in cancer screening monitoring policy.
