Breast cancer rescreening in low-income women


      Introduction: Routine mammography screening with clinical breast examination is effective in reducing breast cancer mortality. The Breast and Cervical Health Program (BCHP) in Washington State provides free breast and cervical cancer screening for low-income women, with an emphasis on women of color. This study examined initial breast cancer rescreening and factors associated with rescreening for women enrolled in BCHP in King County, Washington.
      Methods: Data were obtained from the Washington State BCHP tracking system. We estimated the percentages who received breast cancer rescreening for women enrolled between July 1994 and December 1995 using survival analysis. Cox proportional regression was also used to examine factors associated with time-until-rescreening.
      Results: Survival analysis showed that the overall percentages rescreened at 15 and 27 months for women aged 50–69 were 25.7% and 45.0%, respectively. For women aged 40–49, the corresponding percentages were 26.0% and 40.3%. Rescreening differed by age groups, race/ethnicity, level of education, foreign born status, history of previous mammography, and enrollment clinic.
      Conclusions: Results from this study suggested that in addition to initial efforts for enrollment, screening programs should emphasize increased rescreening especially for women with certain demographic and screening history characteristics.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • CDC
        Chronic disease reports.
        MMWR. 1989; 38: 565-569
        • Kerlikowske K
        • Grady D
        • Rubin S.M
        • Sandrock C
        • Ernster V.L
        Efficacy of screening mammography.
        JAMA. 1995; 273: 149-154
        • U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
        Guide to clinical preventive services, 2nd ed. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore1996
      1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures: 1997. Atlanta, Georgia; 1997.

      2. National Cancer Institute and American Cancer Society. Joint Statement on Breast Cancer Screening for Women in their 40s. The Cancer Information Service; March 27, 1997.

        • Vernon S.W
        • Laville E.A
        • Jackson G.L
        Participation in breast screening programs.
        Soc Sci Med. 1990; 30: 1107-1118
        • Baker L.H
        Breast cancer detection demonstration project.
        CA-A Cancer J Clinicians. 1982; 32: 194-225
        • Fink R
        • Shaprio S
        • Roester R
        Impact of efforts to increase participation in repetitive screenings for early breast cancer detection.
        Am J Pub Health. 1972; 62: 328-336
        • Johnson M.M
        • et al.
        Compliance with the screening mammography program of British Columbia.
        Can J Pub Health. 1996; 87: 176-180
        • CDC
        Self-reported use of mammography among women age ≥ 40 years.
        MMWR. 1997; 46 (40)
        • Morrison A.S
        Screening in chronic disease, 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, New York1992: 91
        • Selvin S
        Statistical analysis of epidemiologic data. Oxford University Press, New York1991
        • Singer J.D
        • Willett J.B
        Modeling the days of our lives.
        Psychol Bull. 1991; 110: 268-290
        • Armitage P
        • Berry G
        Statistical methods in medical research, 3rd ed. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford1994