Journal List > Asian Oncol Nurs > v.15(4) > 1081851

Lee, Park, Kang, Yun, Sin, and Kim: Factors Affecting Prostate Cancer Screening Behavior

Abstract

Purpose

This study was to examine the factors affecting prostate cancer screening behavior in Korean men using the health belief model (HBM).

Methods

It was a descriptive cross-sectional survey. A total of 121 participants answered questionnaires which included general characteristics, knowledge, and HBM variables related to prostate cancer and prostate cancer screening tests.

Results

Only 18 participants (14.9%) had had a prostate cancer screening test before. Participants who had had a prostate cancer screening test were more likely to perceive lower health status (odds ratio: 0.61 [95% confidence interval: 0.39, 0.93]), higher perceived sensitivity (odds ratio: 3.55 [95% confidence interval: 1.11, 11.36]), and higher self-efficacy (odds ratio: 5.77 [95% confidence interval: 1.51, 22.08]) than participants who had not had a test.

Conclusion

We recommend developing an educational program which can increase the level of perceived sensitivity and self-efficacy to involve themselves in prostate cancer screening test actively.

Figures and Tables

Table 1

Demographics and the Level of Knowledge, Health Belief, and Self-efficacy related to Prostate Cancer and Prostate Cancer Screening Behavior of Participants (N =121)

aon-15-256-i001
Characteristics Categories n (%) M±SD Range
Age (year) 55.4±8.0 40~75
Religion Yes 102 (84.3)
No 19 (15.7)
Spouse Yes 113 (93.4)
No 8 (6.6)
Educational level ≤High school 56 (46.3)
≥College 65 (53.7)
Occupation Yes 94 (78.3)
No 26 (21.7)
Monthly income (10,000 won) <300 66 (55.0)
≥300 54 (45.0)
PSA test Yes 18 (14.9)
No 103 (85.1)
Diagnosis for cancer Yes 13 (10.7)
No 108 (89.3)
Prostate cancer history of family Yes 7 (5.8)
No 114 (94.2)
Prostate cancer history of friends or colleague Yes 16 (13.2)
No 105 (86.8)
Health education for prostate cancer Yes 14 (11.6)
No 107 (88.4)
Perceived health status 7.44±1.96 3~10
Knowledge 8.96±1.82 0~17
Health belief Perceived sensitivity 2.32±0.78 1~5
Perceived seriousness 3.07±0.66 1~5
Perceived benefit 3.73±0.65 1~5
Perceived barrier 2.86±0.53 1~5
Self-efficacy 2.94±0.74 1~5

PSA=Prostate specific antigen.

Table 2

Differences of Characteristics according to the Experience of PSA Test (N =121)

aon-15-256-i002
Characteristics Categories Yes (n=18) No (n=103) χ2 or t p
n (%) or M±SD n (%) or M±SD
Religion Yes 14 (77.8) 88 (85.4) 0.68 .481
No 4 (22.2) 15 (14.6)
Spouse Yes 17 (94.4) 100 (97.1) 0.34 .563
No 1 (5.6) 3 (2.9)
Educational level ≤High school 8 (44.4) 48 (46.6) 0.03 .866
≥College 10 (55.6) 55 (53.4)
Occupation Yes 14 (77.8) 80 (78.4) 0.01 .951
No 4 (22.2) 22 (21.6)
Monthly income (10,000 won) <300 9 (52.9) 57 (55.3) 0.03 .854
≥300 8 (47.1) 46 (44.7)
Diagnosis for cancer Yes 3 (16.7) 10 (9.7) 0.77 .379
No 15 (83.3) 93 (90.3)
Family history Yes 4 (22.2) 3 (2.9) 10.48 .001
No 14 (77.8) 100 (97.1)
Prostate cancer history of friends or colleague Yes 7 (38.9) 9 (8.7) 12.14 <.001
No 11 (61.1) 94 (91.3)
Experience of prostate cancer health education Yes 5 (27.8) 9 (8.7) 5.43 .020
No 13 (72.2) 94 (91.3)
Age (year) 59.6±7.0 54.7±7.9 2.39 .018
Perceived health status 6.06±1.92 7.67±1.88 - 3.25 .002
Knowledge 10.56±2.15 8.10±3.36 4.06 <.001
Health belief Perceived sensitivity 2.94±0.84 2.22±0.73 3.70 <.001
Perceived seriousness 3.21±0.66 3.05±0.65 .967 .335
Perceived benefit 3.85±0.82 3.71±0.61 .837 .404
Perceived barrier 2.70±0.65 2.89±0.50 - 1.39 .166
Self-efficacy 3.56±0.67 2.84±0.71 4.00 <.001

PSA=Prostate specific antigen.

Table 3

Predictors of Prostate Cancer Screening Behavior

aon-15-256-i003
Predictors Multiple logistic regression
OR 95% CI p
Age (year) 1.07 0.95, 1.20 .305
Prostate cancer history of siblings or father (ref.=no) 1.23 0.05, 33.43 .902
Prostate cancer history of friends or colleague (ref.=no) 2.53 0.39, 16.33 .331
Health education for prostate cancer (ref.=no) 0.48 0.04, 5.74 .563
Perceived health status 0.61 0.39, 0.93 .023
Knowledge level about prostate cancer & screening test 1.20 0.93, 1.56 .163
Perceived sensitivity 3.55 1.11, 11.36 .033
Self-efficacy for early detection test for prostate cancer 5.77 1.51, 22.08 .011
- 2 Log likelihood 52.69
Cox & snell R square .30
Nagelkerke R square .53
χ2 (p) 39.79 (<.001)

PSA=Prostate specific antigen.

Notes

This work was supported by the Dong-A University research fund.

References

1. Korea Central Cancer Registry Division. National cancer registry statistics (Annual report of cancer statistics in Korea in 2011). Ministry of Health and Welfare;2013.
2. Jung K, Won Y, Kong H, Oh C, Lee DH, Lee JS. Cancer statistics in Korea: incidence, mortality, survival, and prevalence in 2011. Cancer Res Treat. 2014; 46(2):109–123.
crossref
3. Han JH, Yoon SJ, Lee YG. Background and validity of the promotion of prostate-specific antigen based prostate cancer screening to national cancer screening program. Korean J Urol Oncol. 2010; 8(1):1–9.
4. Song SY, Kim SR, Ahn G, Choi HY. Pathologic characteristics of prostatic adenocarcinomas: a mapping analysis of Korean patients. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2003; 6(2):143–147.
crossref
5. Sirovich BE, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. Screening men for prostate and colorectal cancer in the United States: does practice reflect the evidence? JAMA. 2003; 289(11):1414–1420.
crossref
6. Melia J, Moss S, Johns L. Rates of prostate-specific antigen testing in general practice in England and Wales in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients: a cross-sectional study. BJU Int. 2004; 94(1):51–56.
crossref
7. Collin SM, Martin RM, Metcalfe C, Gunnell D, Albertsen PC, Neal D, et al. Prostate-cancer mortality in the USA and UK in 1975-2004: an ecological study. Lancet Oncol. 2008; 9(5):445–452.
crossref
8. Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Ciatto S, Nelen V, et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360(13):1320–1328.
crossref
9. Park SK, Sakoda LC, Kang D, Chokkalingam AP, Lee E, Shin H, et al. Rising prostate cancer rates in South Korea. Prostate. 2006; 66(12):1285–1291.
crossref
10. Rosenstock IM. What research in motivation suggests for public health. Am J Public Health Nations Health. 1997; 03. 50:295–302.
crossref
11. Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K. Health behavior and health education: theory, research, and practice. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons;2008.
12. Redding CA, Rossi JS, Rossi SR, Velicer WF, Proschaska JO. Health behavior models. Int Electron J Health Educ. 2000; 3(Special issue):180–193.
13. The Korean Urological Oncology Society. Clinical guidelines on prostate carcinoma 2004. Accessed December 13, 2012. http://www.kuos.or.kr./05/05.condition.asp.
14. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang A, Buchner A. G*power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007; 39(2):175–191.
crossref
15. Radosevich DM, Partin MR, Nugent S, Nelson D, Flood AB, Holtzman J, et al. Measuring patient knowledge of the risks and benefits of prostate cancer screening. Patient Educ Couns. 2004; 54(2):143–152.
crossref
16. Boehm S, Coleman-Burns P, Schlenk EA, Funnell MM, Parzuchowski J, Powell IJ. Prostate cancer in African American men: increasing knowledge and self-efficacy. J Community Health Nurs. 1995; 12(3):161–169.
crossref
17. Jacobs LA. Health beliefs of first-degree relatives of individuals with colorectal cancer and participation in health maintenance visits: a population-based survey. Cancer Nurs. 2002; 08. 25(4):251–265.
crossref
18. Champion VL. Revised susceptibility, benefits, and barriers scale for mammography screening. Res Nurs Health. 1999; 22(4):341–348.
crossref
19. Choi KS, Park JK. Epidemiologic Characteristics of Prostate Cancer Detection. Korean J Urol Oncol. 2009; 50(11):1054–1058.
crossref
20. Ministry of Health and Welfare. Study report for 5 items of cancer screening test to reach to all population in South Korea. Ministry of Health and Welfare;2004.
21. Park KH. Related Factors to Do Prostate Cancer Screening Test [master's thesis]. Seoul: Chung-Ang Univ;2009.
22. Lee HY, Jung Y. Older Korean American men's prostate cancer screening behavior: the prime role of culture. J Immigr Minor Health. 2013; 15(6):1030–1037.
crossref
23. Pierce R, Chadiha LA, Vargas A, Mosley M. Prostate cancer and psychosocial concerns in African American men: literature synthesis and recommendations. Health Soc Work. 2003; 11. 28(4):302–311.
crossref
24. Hannover W, Kopke D, Hannich HJ. Perceived barriers to prostate cancer screenings among middle-aged men in north-eastern Germany. Public Health Nurs. 2010; 11-12. 27(6):504–512.
crossref
25. Lehto RH, Song L, Stein KF, Coleman-Burns P. Factors influencing prostate cancer screening in African American men. West J Nurs Res. 2010; 10. 32(6):779–793.
crossref
26. Kim NS, Lee KE. Effecting factors on cancer preventive behaviors for middle aged man/woman. J Korean Acad Fundam Nurs. 2014; 21(1):29–38.
27. Kim MH, Choi SH. Effect of nursing intervention on the knowledge, health beliefs, self-efficacy and rescreening compliance of cervical cancer screening clients. Korean J Women Health Nurs. 2007; 13(3):157–164.
crossref
28. Drake BF, Shelton RC, Gilligan T, Allen JD. A church-based intervention to promote informed decision making for prostate cancer screening among African American men. J Natl Med Assoc. 2010; 03. 102(3):164–171.
crossref
TOOLS
Similar articles