Application of Health Belief Model on the Predictors of Screening for Cervical Cancer in Surakarta, Central Java

Gabriela Advitri Febriani, S. Rahardjo, Bhisma Murti
{"title":"Application of Health Belief Model on the Predictors of Screening for Cervical Cancer in Surakarta, Central Java","authors":"Gabriela Advitri Febriani, S. Rahardjo, Bhisma Murti","doi":"10.26911/THEICPH.2018.02.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Research on Indonesian women that examine factors associated with uptaking regular Pap or Visual Inspection Acetic Acid (VIA) tests is lacking. The purpose of this study was to use the health belief model (HBM) as a framework to examine predictors of Pap or VIA testing. Subjects and Method: An analytic cross-sectional study has been conducted at Permata Harapan Clinic and Budi Sehat Laboratory Clinic, Surakarta, Central Java. The data were collected from February to March 2018. A sample of 200 women was selected by random sampling, consisting of 74 women undertaking screening and 126 women not undertaking screening. The dependent variable was use of screening for cervical cancer. The independent variables were perceived susceptibility, seriousness, benefit, barrier, education, income, and social support. Data on screening were taken from medical record. Other variables were measured by questionnaire. The data were analyzed by path analysis. Results: Perceived susceptibility (b= 2.20; 95% CI= 1.38 to 3.02; p<0.001), seriousness (b= 1.24; 95% CI= 0.18 to 2.30; p= 0.022), and benefit (b= 1.24; 95% CI= 0.17 to 2.30; p= 0.023) were positive predictors of screening. Perceived barrier (b= -1.03; 95% CI= -1.83 to -0.23; p=0.012) was a negative predictor of screening. Education, income, and social support were significant and indirect predictors of screening. Conclusion: Perceived susceptibility, seriousness, and benefit are positive predictors of screening. Perceived barrier is a negative predictor of screening. Education, income, and social support are significant and indirect predictors of screening. Health belief model can be used to predict uptake of screening for cervical cancer.","PeriodicalId":297517,"journal":{"name":"Reaching the Unreached: Improving Population Health in the Rural and Remote Areas","volume":"84 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reaching the Unreached: Improving Population Health in the Rural and Remote Areas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26911/THEICPH.2018.02.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Research on Indonesian women that examine factors associated with uptaking regular Pap or Visual Inspection Acetic Acid (VIA) tests is lacking. The purpose of this study was to use the health belief model (HBM) as a framework to examine predictors of Pap or VIA testing. Subjects and Method: An analytic cross-sectional study has been conducted at Permata Harapan Clinic and Budi Sehat Laboratory Clinic, Surakarta, Central Java. The data were collected from February to March 2018. A sample of 200 women was selected by random sampling, consisting of 74 women undertaking screening and 126 women not undertaking screening. The dependent variable was use of screening for cervical cancer. The independent variables were perceived susceptibility, seriousness, benefit, barrier, education, income, and social support. Data on screening were taken from medical record. Other variables were measured by questionnaire. The data were analyzed by path analysis. Results: Perceived susceptibility (b= 2.20; 95% CI= 1.38 to 3.02; p<0.001), seriousness (b= 1.24; 95% CI= 0.18 to 2.30; p= 0.022), and benefit (b= 1.24; 95% CI= 0.17 to 2.30; p= 0.023) were positive predictors of screening. Perceived barrier (b= -1.03; 95% CI= -1.83 to -0.23; p=0.012) was a negative predictor of screening. Education, income, and social support were significant and indirect predictors of screening. Conclusion: Perceived susceptibility, seriousness, and benefit are positive predictors of screening. Perceived barrier is a negative predictor of screening. Education, income, and social support are significant and indirect predictors of screening. Health belief model can be used to predict uptake of screening for cervical cancer.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
健康信念模型在中爪哇市苏腊惹市宫颈癌筛查预测因子中的应用
背景:缺乏对印度尼西亚妇女进行定期子宫颈抹片检查或醋酸目视检查(VIA)相关因素的研究。本研究的目的是使用健康信念模型(HBM)作为框架来检查Pap或VIA检测的预测因子。对象和方法:在中爪哇苏拉arta Permata Harapan诊所和Budi Sehat实验室诊所进行了一项分析性横断面研究。数据收集于2018年2月至3月。随机抽取200名妇女样本,其中74名妇女接受筛查,126名妇女未接受筛查。因变量是使用宫颈癌筛查。自变量为感知易感性、严重性、获益、障碍、教育程度、收入和社会支持。筛查数据取自病历。其他变量通过问卷测量。采用通径分析法对数据进行分析。结果:感知敏感性(b= 2.20;95% CI= 1.38 ~ 3.02;P <0.001),严重程度(b= 1.24;95% CI= 0.18 ~ 2.30;P = 0.022)和获益(b= 1.24;95% CI= 0.17 ~ 2.30;P = 0.023)为筛查的阳性预测因子。感知障碍(b= -1.03;95% CI= -1.83 ~ -0.23;P =0.012)为筛查的阴性预测因子。教育、收入和社会支持是筛查的重要间接预测因素。结论:感知易感性、严重度和获益是筛查的积极预测因素。感知障碍是筛查的负面预测因子。教育、收入和社会支持是筛查的重要间接预测因素。健康信念模型可用于预测宫颈癌筛查的接受程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Life Course Factors associated with Wasting in Children under Five in East Lombok, West Nusa Tenggara Knowledge, Facilities, and Their Associations with Nurse Adherence to Hand Hygiene at Subulussalam Hospital, Aceh Effectiveness of Citrus Fruit in Relieving Nausea during Pregnancy in Tanjungpinang, Kepulauan Riau, Indonesia A Qualitative Study on the Factors Influencing the Choice of Working as a Commercial Seks Workers at Bandar Baru, Deliserdang, North Sumatera Application of Health Belief Model on the Predictors of Screening for Cervical Cancer in Surakarta, Central Java
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1