Chalapati Wadwilai, Chumworathayi Bandit
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand.
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2007 Jan-Mar;8(1):119-23.
Our objective was to assess the efficiency of a home-visit invitation aimed to increase uptake of cervical cancer screening in women between 35 and 60 years of age. From May, 2006, we conducted a quasi-randomized trial to determine if an in-home education and invitation intervention would increase uptake of cervical cancer screening. We randomly recruited 304 women from the Samliem inner-city community, Khon Kaen, Northeast Thailand, and assigned participants to either the intervention or control zone. Baseline screening coverage interviews were then performed: 58 of 158 women in the intervention zone and 46 of 146 in the control zone were excluded from the study because of having had a Pap smear within 5 years, but these were included in the final analysis. First, 100 women in the intervention group were visited in their homes by one of the researchers, who provided culturally-sensitive health education that emphasized the need for screening. Four months later, post-intervention, screening-coverage interviews were again performed in both groups, in combination with the same health education for 100 women in the control group for a comparison. There was no difference in the baseline Pap smear screening-coverage rate in the intervention vs. control zones (36.7 vs. 31.5%, p=0.339). One hundred women in the intervention group completed the intervention interviews and after four months, 100 women in the intervention group and 100 in the control group also completed the post-intervention interviews. The increased screening-coverage rate in the intervention zone was similar to that of the control zone (43.6 vs. 34.9%, p=0.119); however, there was a borderline significant increase in the intervention zone compared with baseline (36.7 to 43.6%, p=0.070). Therefore, home visit education and invitation intervention produced only a nominal effect on increasing Pap smear coverage within a 4-month study period.
我们的目标是评估一项旨在提高35至60岁女性宫颈癌筛查接受率的家访邀请的效果。从2006年5月起，我们进行了一项准随机试验，以确定家庭健康教育和邀请干预措施是否会提高宫颈癌筛查的接受率。我们从泰国东北部孔敬府三廉市中心社区随机招募了304名女性，并将参与者分配到干预区或对照区。随后进行了基线筛查覆盖率访谈：干预区158名女性中有58名、对照区146名女性中有46名因在5年内进行过巴氏涂片检查而被排除在研究之外，但这些数据被纳入最终分析。首先，干预组的100名女性接受了一名研究人员的家访，研究人员提供了注重文化敏感性的健康教育，强调了筛查的必要性。四个月后，即干预后，两组再次进行了筛查覆盖率访谈，并对对照组的100名女性进行了相同的健康教育以作比较。干预区与对照区的基线巴氏涂片筛查覆盖率没有差异（36.7%对31.5%，p=0.339）。干预组的100名女性完成了干预访谈，四个月后，干预组的100名女性和对照组的100名女性也完成了干预后访谈。干预区筛查覆盖率的提高与对照区相似（43.6%对34.9%，p=0.119）；然而，与基线相比，干预区有边缘性显著提高（从36.7%提高到43.6%，p=0.070）。因此，在家访教育和邀请干预措施在4个月的研究期内对提高巴氏涂片检查覆盖率仅产生了名义上的效果。
