IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/10.2105-ajph.2015.302863_7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Barriers to cervical screening among sex workers in vancouver

Author

Listed:
  • Duff, P.
  • Ogilvie, G.
  • Shoveller, J.
  • Amram, O.
  • Chettiar, J.
  • Nguyen, P.
  • Dobrer, S.
  • Montaner, J.
  • Shannon, K.

Abstract

Objectives. We longitudinally examined the social, structural, and geographic correlates of cervical screening among sex workers in Metropolitan Vancouver, British Columbia, to determine the roles that physical and social geography play in routine reproductive health care access. Methods. Analysis drew on (2010-2013) data from an open prospective cohort of sex workers (An Evaluation of Sex Workers' Health Access). We used multivariable logistic regression with generalized estimating equations (GEE) to model correlates of regular cervical screening. Results. At baseline, 236 (38.6%) of 611 sex workers in our sample had received cervical screening, and 63 (10.3%) were HIV-seropositive. In multivariable GEE analysis, HIV-seropositivity (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.06, 2.58) and accessing outreach services (AOR = 1.35; 95% CI = 1.09, 1.66) were correlated with regular cervical screening. Experiencing barriers to health care access (e.g., poor treatment by health care staff, limited hours of operation, and language barriers) reduced odds of regular Papanicolaou testing (AOR = 0.81; 95% CI = 0.65, 1.00). Conclusions. Sex workers in Metropolitan Vancouver had suboptimal levels of cervical screening. Innovative mobile outreach service delivery models offering cervical screening as one component of sex worker-targeted comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services mayhold promise.

Suggested Citation

  • Duff, P. & Ogilvie, G. & Shoveller, J. & Amram, O. & Chettiar, J. & Nguyen, P. & Dobrer, S. & Montaner, J. & Shannon, K., 2016. "Barriers to cervical screening among sex workers in vancouver," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 106(2), pages 366-373.
    • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2015.302863_7
    DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2015.302863
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302863
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302863?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2015.302863_7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.