Journal of Cancer Education

, Volume 28, Issue 2, pp 367–374 | Cite as

Pap Screening Goals and Perceptions of Pain among Black, Latina, and Arab Women: Steps Toward Breaking down Psychological Barriers

  • Julie W. Gauss
  • Athur Mabiso
  • Karen Patricia Williams
Article

Abstract

Understanding women’s psychological barriers to getting Papanicolaou (Pap) screening has potential to impact cancer disparities. This study examined pain perceptions of Pap testing among black, Latina, and Arab women and goal setting to receive Pap tests. Data on 420 women, in a longitudinal study, were analyzed using Chi-square tests of differences and generalized linear mixed models. At baseline, 30.3 % of black and 35.5 % of Latina women perceived Pap tests to be very painful compared to 24.2 % of Arab women. Perceptions of pain influenced goal settings, such as scheduling a first ever Pap test (odds ratio = 0.58, 95 % confidence interval 0.14–0.94). Immediately following the intervention, women’s perception that Pap tests are very painful significantly declined (P value <0.001) with Arab and black women registering the greatest improvements (20.3 and 17.3 % reduction, respectively, compared to 8.4 % for Latina). Having the perception that the Pap test is very painful significantly reduces the likelihood of black, Latina, and Arab women setting the goal to schedule their first ever Pap test. Latina women are the least likely to improve their perception that the Pap test is very painful, though national statistics show they have the highest rates of morbidity and mortality from cervical cancer. These findings are instructive for designing tailored interventions to break down psychological barriers to Pap screening among underserved women.

Keywords

Cervical cancer screening Pap test Perceptions of pain Cancer disparities Race Ethnicity 

References

  1. 1.
    Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E et al (2008) Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin 58:71–96. doi:10.3322/CA.2007.0010 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jemal A, Thun M, Ries L et al (2008) Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2005, featuring trends in lung cancer, tobacco use, and tobacco control. J Natl Cancer Inst 100(23):1672–1694PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2008. Cancer screening and treatment in women: recent findings. http://www.ahrq.gov/research/cancerwom.htm#intro
  5. 5.
    Hakama M, Miller AB, Day NE (eds) (1986) Screening for cancer of the uterine cervix: from the IARC working group on cervical cancer screening and the UICC project group on the evaluation of screening programmes for cancer. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jemal A, Thomas A, Murray T et al (2002) Cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin 52:23–47. doi:10.3322/canjclin.52.1.23 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hoyo C, Yarnall KSH, Skinner CS et al (2005) Pain predicts non-adherence to pap smear screening among middle-aged African American women. Preventive Medicine 41:439–445PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). Cancer Screening—United States, 2010. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. December 2012, Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6103a1.htm?s_cid=mm6103a1_w
  9. 9.
    Watson M, Saraiya M, Benard V et al (2008) Burden of cervical cancer in the United States, 1998–2003. Cancer 113:2855–2864. doi:10.1002/cncr.23756 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    National Cancer Institute (2009). SEER cancer statistics review 1975–2007. Bethesda, MD Retrieved from http://seer.cancer.gov
  11. 11.
    Jennings-Dozier K (1999) Predicting intentions to obtain a Pap smear among African American and Latina Women: Testing the theory of planned behavior. Nurs Res 48(4):198–205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    de la Cruz GP, Brittingham A. The Arab population: census 2000 brief. December 2003, US Census BureauGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    American Community Survey. 2008. Selected population characteristics & interactive map. Demographics data from the Arab American Institute. December 2012, Retrieved from http://www.aaiusa.org/pages/demographics/
  14. 14.
    Matin M, LeBaron S (2004) Attitudes toward cervical cancer screening among Muslim women: a pilot study. Women & Health 39(3):63–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Salman K (2012) Health beliefs and practices related to cancer screening among Arab Muslim women in an urban community. Health Care for Women International 33(1):45–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Michigan Department of Community Health and Michigan Public Health Institute. Special cancer behavioral risk factor survey, 2008. www.michigancancer.org/PDFs/MCCReports/SCBRFS_2008-042910.pdf.
  17. 17.
    Williams KP, Mullan PB, Todem D (2009) Moving from theory to practice: implementing the Kin KeeperSM Cancer Prevention model. Health Educ Res 24:343–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Williams KP, Reiter P, Mabiso A, Maurer J, Paskett E (2009) Family History of cancer predicts Papanicolaou screening behavior for African American and White women. Cancer 115(1):179–189PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mandelblatt JS, Gold K, O'Malley AS et al (1999) Breast and Cervix cancer screening among multiethnic women: role of age, health, and source of care. Preventive Medicine 28(4):418–425PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Harlan LC, Bernstein AB, Kessler LG (1991) Cervical cancer screening: who is not screened and why? Am J Public Health 81(7):885–890PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Skrondal A, Rabe-Hesketh S (2009) Prediction in multilevel generalized linear models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 172:659–687Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Skrondal A, Rabe-Hesketh S (2004) Generalized latent variable modeling: multilevel, longitudinal, and structural equation models. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FLCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Raudenbush SW, Bryk AS (2002) Hierarchical linear models: applications and data analysis methods, 2nd edn. Sage, Newbury Park, CAGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    SAS Institute Inc., 2008. SAS/STAT® 9.2 User's guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Percac-Lima S, Aldrich LS, Gamba MA et al (2011) Barriers to follow-up of an abnormal Pap smear in Latina women referred for colposcopy. J Gen Intern Med 25(11):1198–1204CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julie W. Gauss
    • 1
  • Athur Mabiso
    • 2
  • Karen Patricia Williams
    • 3
  1. 1.College of Osteopathic MedicineMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  2. 2.Development Strategy and Governance DivisionInternational Food Policy Research InstituteWashingtonUSA
  3. 3.Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, College of Human MedicineMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations