METHODS: A systematic review was conducted on breast cancer screening studies among Malaysian women, published between January 2006 and December 2015. Online databases were searched using keywords: "mammogram", "mammography", "uptake", "breast cancer screening" and "Malaysia".
RESULTS: Thirteen original articles were reviewed. The rate of mammography uptake ranged between 3.6% and 30.9% among the general population, and 80.3% among personnel of a tertiary hospital. Factors associated with mammogram screening were clinical breast examination, age, income, knowledge on breast cancer and mammogram, perceived susceptibility to breast cancer, ethnicity and education level. Barriers to mammogram screening were lack of knowledge, embarrassment, fear of cancer diagnosis, perception that breast screening was unnecessary, lack of coping skills and pain during procedure. However, almost all of the studies could not be generalised beyond the study sample because of the limited number of sites and respondents; and most data were self-reported with no objective measures of the responses.
CONCLUSION: Mammogram screening uptake among women in selected communities were generally low. Further studies involving the general population are essential. Future studies should also explore the availability, affordability and accessibility of this service especially in the pursuit of achieving universal health coverage in breast cancer management.
METHODS: From October 2011 to June 2015, 1,778 asymptomatic women, aged 40-74 years, underwent subsidised mammographic screening. All patients had a clinical breast examination before mammographic screening, and women with mammographic abnormalities were referred to a surgeon. The cancer detection rate and variables associated with a recommendation for adjunct ultrasonography were determined.
RESULTS: The mean age for screening was 50.8 years and seven cancers (0.39%) were detected. The detection rate was 0.64% in women aged 50 years and above, and 0.12% in women below 50 years old. Adjunct ultrasonography was recommended in 30.7% of women, and was significantly associated with age, menopausal status, mammographic density and radiologist's experience. The main reasons cited for recommendation of an adjunct ultrasound was dense breasts and mammographic abnormalities.
DISCUSSION: The cancer detection rate is similar to population-based screening mammography programmes in high-income Asian countries. Unlike population-based screening programmes in Caucasian populations where the adjunct ultrasonography rate is 2-4%, we report that 3 out of 10 women attending screening mammography were recommended for adjunct ultrasonography. This could be because Asian women attending screening are likely premenopausal and hence have denser breasts. Radiologists who reported more than 360 mammograms were more confident in reporting a mammogram as normal without adjunct ultrasonography compared to those who reported less than 180 mammograms.
CONCLUSION: Our subsidised opportunistic mammographic screening programme is able to provide equivalent cancer detection rates but the high recall for adjunct ultrasonography would make screening less cost-effective.
METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 200 women in Shah Alam, Selangor; Malaysia. The questionnaire contained 27 questions and was comprised of two sections; socio-demographic characteristics and practices, knowledge and barriers of mammography. All the data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 13.0.
RESULTS: Of the 200 Malaysian women who participated in this study, the majority were under the age of 50 years (65.5%), Malay (86%), and married (94.5%). Regarding any family history of cancer in general, the majority of the participants had none (78%). However, some did report a close relative with breast cancer (16.5%). While the majority of them knew about mammography (68%), 15% had had a mammogram once in their life and only 2% had the procedure every two or three years. Univariate analysis showed that age, family history of cancer, family history of breast cancer, regular supplement intake, regular medical check-up and knowledge about mammogram were significantly associated with mammogram practice among the general population (p=0.007, p=0.043, P=0.015, p=0.01, p=0.001, p<0.001; respectively). Multivariate analysis using multiple linear regression test showed that age, regular medical check-up and knowledge about mammography testing were statistically associated with the practice of mammography among the general population in Malaysia (p=0.035, p=0.015 and p<0.001; respectively). Lack of time, lack of knowledge, not knowing where to go for the test and a fear of the test result were the most important barriers (42.5%, 32%, 21%, 20%; respectively).
CONCLUSION: The practice of mammogram screening is low among Malaysian women.
METHOD: The study applied a quantitative approach based on the cross-sectional survey design and multistage cluster random sampling. A total of 400 women aged 35-69 years, were surveyed at 4 obstetric and gynecologic clinics affiliated to Tehran University of Medical Sciences in Tehran: the participation levels of 86 women who have had a mammogram were analyzed based on their self-efficacy, belief, social influence, and barriers concerning mammography utilization.
RESULTS: Consistent with the study framework, in bivariate analysis, the higher level of women's participation in breast cancer prevention programs was significantly related to more positive belief about mammography (p< .05), greater social influence on mammography (p< .01) and fewer barriers to mammography (p< .01). Self efficacy (p= .114) was not significantly related to the higher level of participation.
CONCLUSION: Results suggest that women's participation levels in breast cancer prevention programs might be associated with the specific psychosocial factors on breast cancer preventive behavior such as mammography screening.