The 130th Annual Meeting of APHA

Abstract #39402

David E. Nelson, MD, MPH¹, Julie C Bolen, PhD, MPH², Stephen Marcus, PhD³, Henry E. Wells, MS⁴, and Whitney Randolph, PhD¹. (1) Health Communication and Informatics Research Branch, National Cancer Institute, 6130 Executive Blvd., Room 4068, MSC 7365, Bethesda, MD 20892-7365, (2) Health Care and Aging Studies Branch, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, K-47, Atlanta, GA 30341, (3) NCI, Tobacco Control Evaluation Branch, 6130 Executive Boulevard, Room 4039B, MSC 7337, Bethesda, MD 20892, (4) Research Triangle Institute, 2951 Flowers Rd. South, Suite 119, Atlanta, GA 30341

State data are available each year from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) on adult health risk factors. Based on county of residence, data from the 1997-1999 BRFSS were reweighted for U.S. metropolitan areas using intercensal estimates. We analyzed data for 69 areas with sample sizes=>300 on receipt of pap test among women aged=>18 years, mammography among women aged=>40 years, and colorectal cancer screening (fecal occult blood testing [FOBT] and sigmoidoscopy) for persons aged=>50 years. Stratified analyses by demographics were performed for the 25 largest metropolitan areas. Overall estimates ranged from 64.6% in Huntington, WV, to 82.0% in Boston for mammography; from 77.2% in Huntington, WV to 91.7% in Richmond for pap test; from 9.9% in Oklahoma City to 35.2% in Greensboro, NC for FOBT; and from 17.3% in Oklahoma City to 43.3% in Cleveland for sigmoidoscopy. For the 25 largest metropolitan areas, cancer screening prevalence was generally lower for Hispanics than for Whites and Blacks, and screening was lower for persons with high school education. Pap testing was less common among women aged 65 years, and colorectal cancer screening was less common for persons aged 50-64 years. These data should assist state and local health officials target screening efforts more effectively, and provide baseline estimates for more localized surveys within metropolitan areas.

Learning Objectives:

• 1. Recognize that Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data are valuable for monitoring risk behaviors at the metropolitan level.
• 2. Understand the range and variability of estimates for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening across metropolitan areas.
• 3. Consider utilizing BRFSS data for targeting prevention efforts toward high risk populations within metropolitan areas.

Keywords: Cancer Screening, Urban Health

Presenting author's disclosure statement:
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.