IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v110y2014icp74-80.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Examining regional variation in the use of cancer screening in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Vogt, Verena
  • Siegel, Martin
  • Sundmacher, Leonie

Abstract

The detection of cancer in its early latent stages can improve a patient's chances of recovery and thereby reduce the overall burden of the disease. Cancer screening services are, however, only used by a small part of the population and utilization rates vary widely amongst the 402 German districts. This study examines to which extent geographic variation in the use of cancer screening can be explained by accessibility of these services and by spillover effects between adjacent areas, while controlling for a wide range of covariates. District level data on cancer screening utilization rates were calculated for breast, cervical, prostate, skin, and colorectal cancers using German data provided by the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung – KBV) between 2008 and 2011. We estimated the impact of health service variables on cancer screening utilization using spatial and non-spatial regression models. Spatial autocorrelation in the residuals was estimated using Moran's I statistic. After controlling for socioeconomic and other regional covariates, screening rates for breast, prostate, skin, and colorectal cancers are significantly higher in areas with higher physician density. The utilization of Pap-tests, skin cancer screening and colonoscopies is inversely related with average travel time to physicians. The coefficients for the spatial lag are significant and positive in all models. The positive spatial lags indicate that screening utilization rates are determined by knowledge spillovers between neighboring districts. In terms of public policy, our study demonstrates the potential to increase the use of cancer screening services through improving knowledge regarding cancer screening and by ensuring patient access to cancer screening services.

Suggested Citation

  • Vogt, Verena & Siegel, Martin & Sundmacher, Leonie, 2014. "Examining regional variation in the use of cancer screening in Germany," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 74-80.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:110:y:2014:i:c:p:74-80
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.03.033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953614002123
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.03.033?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vincenzo Carrieri & Marcel Bilger, 2013. "Preventive care: underused even when free. Is there something else at work?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(2), pages 239-253, January.
    2. Krieger, N., 1992. "Overcoming the absence of socioeconomic data in medical records: Validation and application of a census-based methodology," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 82(5), pages 703-710.
    3. Taplin, S.H. & Anderman, C. & Grothaus, L. & Curry, S. & Montano, D., 1994. "Using physician correspondence and postcard reminders to promote mammography use," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 84(4), pages 571-574.
    4. Ozegowski, Susanne & Sundmacher, Leonie, 2012. "Ensuring access to health care—Germany reforms supply structures to tackle inequalities," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 105-109.
    5. Wells, B.L. & Horm, J.W., 1998. "Targeting the underserved for breast and cervical cancer screening: The utility of ecological analysis using the national health interview survey," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 88(10), pages 1484-1489.
    6. Sabates, Ricardo & Feinstein, Leon, 2006. "The role of education in the uptake of preventative health care: The case of cervical screening in Britain," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(12), pages 2998-3010, June.
    7. Neilson, Aileen R. & Whynes, David K., 1995. "Determinants of persistent compliance with screening for colorectal cancer," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 365-374, August.
    8. Bentham, Graham & Hinton, Jackie & Haynes, Robin & Lovett, Andrew & Bestwick, Chris, 1995. "Factors affecting non-response to cervical cytology screening in Norfolk, England," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 131-135, January.
    9. Coughlin, Steven S. & Leadbetter, Steven & Richards, Thomas & Sabatino, Susan A., 2008. "Contextual analysis of breast and cervical cancer screening and factors associated with health care access among United States women, 2002," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 260-275, January.
    10. Lairson, David R. & Chan, Wenyaw & Newmark, Georgina R., 2005. "Determinants of the demand for breast cancer screening among women veterans in the United States," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(7), pages 1608-1617, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Weinhold, Ines & Gurtner, Sebastian, 2018. "Rural - urban differences in determinants of patient satisfaction with primary care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 76-85.
    2. Anne-Marie Konopka & Thomas Barnay & Nathalie Billaudeau & Christine Sevilla-Dedieu, 2019. "Les déterminants du recours au dépistage du cancer du col de l’utérus : une analyse départementale," Erudite Working Paper 2019-19, Erudite.
    3. Cindy M. Padilla & François Painblanc & Patricia Soler-Michel & Veronica M. Vieira, 2019. "Mapping Variation in Breast Cancer Screening: Where to Intervene?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-14, June.
    4. Meilin Möllenkamp & Benedetta Pongiglione & Stefan Rabbe & Aleksandra Torbica & Jonas Schreyögg, 2022. "Spillover effects and other determinants of medical device uptake in the presence of a medical guideline: An analysis of drug‐eluting stents in Germany and Italy," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(S1), pages 157-178, September.
    5. Siegel, Martin & Koller, Daniela & Vogt, Verena & Sundmacher, Leonie, 2016. "Developing a composite index of spatial accessibility across different health care sectors: A German example," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 205-212.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alexander Labeit & Frank Peinemann, 2015. "Breast and cervical cancer screening in Great Britain: Dynamic interrelated processes," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Alexander Michael Labeit & Frank Peinemann, 2017. "Determinants of a GP visit and cervical cancer screening examination in Great Britain," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-14, April.
    3. Sarah Hoeck & Johan Van der Heyden & Joanna Geerts & Guido Van Hal, 2013. "Preventive Care Use among the Belgian Elderly Population: Does Socio-Economic Status Matter?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Ansgar Wübker, 2014. "Explaining variations in breast cancer screening across European countries," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(5), pages 497-514, June.
    5. Carrieri, Vincenzo & Wuebker, Ansgar, 2013. "Assessing inequalities in preventive care use in Europe," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(3), pages 247-257.
    6. repec:zbw:rwirep:0370 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Ansgar Wübker, 2012. "Explaining Variations in Breast Cancer Screening Across European Countries," Ruhr Economic Papers 0370, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    8. Yong Kang Cheah & Chor Foon Tang, 2017. "Factors Influencing the use of Preventive Medical Care in Malaysia: Evidence from National Health and Morbidity Survey Data," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 119-137, June.
    9. Gil Lacruz, Ana Isabel & Gil Lacruz, Marta & Gorgemans, Sophie, 2014. "Female preventive practices: Breast and smear tests," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 135-144.
    10. Yunwei Gai & Li Feng & Jing Hao, 2017. "Local Labor Market Condition and Influenza Vaccination," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 45(2), pages 181-199, June.
    11. Carrieri, V. & Wuebker, A., 2012. "Assessing inequalities in preventive care use in Europe: A special case of health-care inequalities?," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 12/25, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    12. repec:zbw:rwirep:0371 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Vincenzo Carrieri & Ansgar Wübker, 2012. "Assessing Inequalities in Preventive Care Use in Europe," Ruhr Economic Papers 0371, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    14. Eric French & Elaine Kelly & Richard Cookson & Carol Propper & Miqdad Asaria & Rosalind Raine, 2016. "Socio‐Economic Inequalities in Health Care in England," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 37, pages 371-403, September.
    15. Farrukh Shahzad & Fahad Saleem & Qaiser Iqbal & Naheed Haque & Sajjad Haider & Muhammad Salman & Imran Masood & Mohamed Azmi Hassali & Shehla Iftikhar & Mohammad Bashaar & Tafseera Hashemi, 2018. "A Cross-Sectional Assessment of Health Literacy among Hypertensive Community of Quetta City, Pakistan," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 11(4), pages 8685-8693, December.
    16. Martin Gaechter & Peter Schwazer & Engelbert Theurl, 2012. "Stronger Sex but Earlier Death: A Multi-level Socioeconomic Analysis of Gender Differences in Mortality in Austria," DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, European Association Comenius - EACO, issue 1, pages 1-23, March.
    17. Schulz, Jan & Mayerhoffer, Daniel M., 2021. "A network approach to consumption," BERG Working Paper Series 173, Bamberg University, Bamberg Economic Research Group.
    18. Clarke, Christina A. & Miller, Tim & Chang, Ellen T. & Yin, Daixin & Cockburn, Myles & Gomez, Scarlett L., 2010. "Racial and social class gradients in life expectancy in contemporary California," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1373-1380, May.
    19. Floriane Calocer & Olivier Dejardin & Karine Droulon & Guy Launoy & Gilles Defer, 2018. "Socio-economic status influences access to second-line disease modifying treatment in Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis patients," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-12, February.
    20. Anne-Marie Konopka & Thomas Barnay & Nathalie Billaudeau & Christine Sevilla-Dedieu, 2019. "Les déterminants du recours au dépistage du cancer du col de l’utérus : une analyse départementale," Erudite Working Paper 2019-19, Erudite.
    21. Allison C. Morgan & Nicholas LaBerge & Daniel B. Larremore & Mirta Galesic & Jennie E. Brand & Aaron Clauset, 2022. "Socioeconomic roots of academic faculty," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(12), pages 1625-1633, December.
    22. Jinani Jayasekera & Eberechukwu Onukwugha & Christopher Cadham & Donna Harrington & Sarah Tom & Francoise Pradel & Michael Naslund, 2019. "An ecological approach to monitor geographic disparities in cancer outcomes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-14, June.

    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:eee:socmed:v:110:y:2014:i:c:p:74-80. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.