You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Articles
Cervical screening among migrant women: a qualitative study of Polish, Slovak and Romanian women in London, UK
  1. Marta Jackowska1,
  2. Christian von Wagner2,
  3. Jane Wardle3,
  4. Dorota Juszczyk4,
  5. Aleksandra Luszczynska5,
  6. Jo Waller6
  1. 1PhD Student, Psychobiology Group, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
  2. 2Senior Research Associate, Cancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
  3. 3Director, Cancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
  4. 4Research Assistant, Cancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
  5. 5Associate Research Professor, Trauma, Health & Hazards Center, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, CO, USA and Warsaw School of Sciences and Humanities, Warsaw, Poland
  6. 6Senior Research Associate, Cancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Jo Waller, Cancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, 1–19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK; j.waller{at}ucl.ac.uk

Abstract

Objective To explore awareness of and participation in cervical screening services in women from Poland, Slovakia and Romania living in London, UK.

Methods Three qualitative studies were carried out in London in 2008–2009: an interview study of professionals working with Central and Eastern European migrants (n=11); a focus group study including three Polish, one Slovak and one Romanian focus group; and an interview study of Polish (n=11), Slovak (n=7) and Romanian (n=2) women.

Results Awareness of the cervical screening programme was good, but understanding of the purpose of screening was sometimes limited. Some women were fully engaged with the UK screening programme; others used screening both in the UK and their countries of origin; and a third group only had screening in their home countries. Women welcomed the fact that screening is free and that reminders are sent, but some were concerned about the screening interval and the age of the first invitation.

Conclusions Migrant women from Poland, Slovakia and Romania living in London vary in their level of participation in the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme. More needs to be done to address concerns regarding screening services, and to ensure that language is not a barrier to participation.

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

https://doi.org/10.1136/jfprhc-2011-100144

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Funding The study was funded by a grant from the Cancer Research UK Prevention and Public Health Policy Advisory Group (C1418/A9847). Jo Waller is the guarantor.

    • Ethical approval The study was approved by the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery and Institute of Neurology Joint Research Ethics Committee. Ethical approval was granted by the University College London (UCL) Research Ethics Committee.

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles

    • Highlights from this issue
      In this issue
      British Medical Journal Publishing Group
      BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health 2012; 38 211-211 Published Online First: 01 Oct 2012. doi: 10.1136/jfprhc-2012-100474