Australian journal of primary health · 2023
Cancer screening in prisons: lessons for health providers.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hesse Sarah, Williamson Kim, Bonney Deborah, Finley Marie, Meehan Tom
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Lifestyle factors place those who experience incarceration at increased risk of morbidity and mortality from a range of preventable diseases, including cancer.
METHODS: Two nurses were employed for a period of 6months to facilitate bowel and breast cancer screening of prisoners across four correctional centres in Queensland. We identify factors impacting on cancer screening in prisons and document the outcomes for those screened.
RESULTS: Both screening programs produced a positivity rate of ∼17% in those screened, with 23 individuals returning a positive faecal occult blood test and five women requiring further investigations following breast screening. At 3months postscreening, all of the positive cases had been referred for further investigations. It is likely that the screening programs were instrumental in preventing morbidity (and mortality) in the subgroup with positive test results.
CONCLUSIONS: Cancer screening within the prison environment presents a number of challenges. Intervention at the individual and systems level is required to ensure prisoners can access a standard of care equal to that provided in the community.
METHODS: Two nurses were employed for a period of 6months to facilitate bowel and breast cancer screening of prisoners across four correctional centres in Queensland. We identify factors impacting on cancer screening in prisons and document the outcomes for those screened.
RESULTS: Both screening programs produced a positivity rate of ∼17% in those screened, with 23 individuals returning a positive faecal occult blood test and five women requiring further investigations following breast screening. At 3months postscreening, all of the positive cases had been referred for further investigations. It is likely that the screening programs were instrumental in preventing morbidity (and mortality) in the subgroup with positive test results.
CONCLUSIONS: Cancer screening within the prison environment presents a number of challenges. Intervention at the individual and systems level is required to ensure prisoners can access a standard of care equal to that provided in the community.