|
|
Columns::October 15, 2001
Golden opportunity
Annual homecoming rituals celebrate ‘New Year--New Memories
Louise McBee Lecture examines ways to enrich college experience
Online and accessible
Moore College will be rededicated as new home of Honors Program
American art history photos will be digitized
‘A mediated version of horror’
School of Music names new director
Coach named for new equestrian program
Newsmakers
Campus News
 |
| Jeff Springston is part of a team exploring which methods of communication are most effective at convincing women to get a mammogram. Photo by Peter Frey |
Public relations professor bridges the gap between intent and action
By Allyson Mann
tiny@uga.edu
If you’re a woman over the age of 40, Jeff Springston wants you to get a mammogram. He doesn’t want you to think about doing it--he wants you to just do it. And then he wants you to do it every year.
Springston has his reasons. More than 190,000 women in the United States will be diagnosed with breast cancer this year, according to estimates from the American Cancer Society. About 40,000 of those women will die, even though breast cancer is 97 percent curable if caught before it spreads. A mammogram is the most effective method of detecting breast cancer early. It’s a simple procedure--the breast is compressed between two flat surfaces and an X-ray is taken--but it must be done every year once a woman reaches 40 because her chance of being diagnosed with breast cancer increases with age.
In addition to the statistics, Springston knows what it’s like to lose a loved one to breast cancer. An aunt was treated successfully, but a cousin and a close family friend were not as lucky. So Springston decided to investigate ways to encourage women to make mammography part of their yearly health care routine.
“We’re really at an age where we’re seeing enormous strides in the hardcore medical sciences,” he says. “We’re less successful at convincing people to change their behaviors and make healthy choices.”
Springston is part of a team of researchers, led by Victoria Champion at Indiana University, that is conducting research aimed at bridging the gap between intent and action. The project explores which method of communication--video or touch-screen computer program--is more effective at convincing women to get a mammogram. Supported by nearly $1.4 million in funding from the National Cancer Institute, the study delivers information about mammography to low-income African-American women--a group that figures prominently in breast-cancer mortality statistics--and tests to find out how many subsequently had a mammogram.
Previous research has shown that video is one of the best ways to reach this audience, but the team hypothesized that a tailored, interactive computer program would be more effective. About halfway through the four-year study, results seem to indicate that they’re right. One month after participating in the study, women who saw the video had a 16 percent rate of mammography, but women who used the computer program had a 20 percent rate. Women in the control group, who received standard care--primarily printed materials available in a doctor’s office--had a 6 percent rate.
Both the video and the computer program--placed in community centers in Indianapolis--surpass standard care because neither relies on a woman’s ability to read. But Springston, who developed both messages, says the video is less effective because of its one-size-fits-all approach.
“Women are at different places mentally; some are more fearful than others. Maybe they’re worried about a mammogram being painful, or maybe they’re concerned that they’ll be exposed to too much radiation. There are a number of barriers that have been identified--not only for African-American women but for women in general--and the computer program was designed to respond to these individual concerns,” he says. “If they’re not worried about pain, for example, then they don’t have to view that aspect of the program. If they do have concerns, then they get information specifically addressing the issue of pain.”
Springston’s research will help the medical community communicate effectively about issues beyond breast cancer. It may also reveal new methods for causing at-risk individuals to choose to get screened earlier. For Springston, that kind of result would be more rewarding than any other.
“This could really improve people’s lives, particularly when dealing with diseases like breast or prostate or colon cancer, which are highly curable if caught early,” Springston says. “It’s really just a matter of convincing people to get screened when they’re supposed to.”
|
|
|
|
|
