Discussion: Screening for Disease
Discussion Week 8
The article that I have chosen to discuss is Cervical Cancer: Prevention and Early Detection. The recommendations within the article for prevnetion and detection include: pap smear screening and HPV vaccination. These recommendations are justified in their importance of early detection and prevention of HPV. The HPV vaccine is a recommendation but not a requirement which make its ethical. To have a mandated vaccine in women of a certain age would be unethical. Ethical considerations need to be looked at related to screening programs and their ability to alter the disease. It the screening does not alter the history of the disease and there is no treatment available then the screening would not be worthwhile. (Friis, Sellers, 2021) “A lack of provider recommendation has been a consistent barrier to increasing vaccination rates.HCPs may lack knowledge of the HPV vaccine and recommendations for vaccination.” (Kessler, 2017) The primary role of education is so that a person can make an informed decision regarding something. A provioder needs to educate pateint’s on the HPV and then it is ultimately the person’s choice. Cervical cancer screening should be begin around 21 years of age. This screening includes pap smear and HPV testing. A pap smear is a test used to check for precancerous cell changes. There are multiple different types HPV which can lead to cervical cancer. “While the rate of HPV infection is high and there is no known cure for HPV, effective primary prevention is available. It is important that both females and males lower their risk with effective health behaviors and HPV vaccination.” (Kessler, 2017) This screening program discussed in this article is population based. Everyone should practice early detection and prevention that is related to cervical cancer. The reported data can be used to improve population health by increasing education. Providing clear and accurate information related to screening and vaccination are critical. This can encourage the ability to overcome barriers related to vaccination and screening in both men and women.
Friis, R. H., & Sellers, T. A. (2021). Epidemiology for public health practice (6th ed.). Jones & Bartlett.
Kessler, T. A. (2017). Cervical Cancer: Prevention and early detection. Seminars in Oncology Nursing, 33(2), 172-183 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749208117300153?via=ihub
Nash, D. B., Skoufalos, A., Fabius, R. J. & Oglesby, W. H. (2021). Accountability for outcomes. In Population health: Creating a culture of wellness (3rd ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Although many individuals and organizations may endorse the goal of screening programs, the details and implementation are often controversial. For some types of screening, it can be quite challenging to weigh the human and economic costs and benefits and determine a clear recommendation. For instance, in an article in the New England Journal of Medicine, Dr. Michael Barry (2009) indicates that “serial PSA [prostate-specific–antigen] screening has at best a modest effect on prostate-cancer mortality during the first decade of follow-up. This benefit comes at the cost of substantial over-diagnosis and overtreatment. It is important to remember that the key question is not whether PSA screening is effective but whether it does more good than harm.”
This week’s Learning Resources include articles about screening programs for four different diseases that contain potentially controversial recommendations. For this Discussion, you will select a disease and examine the epidemiological evidence to assess a recommendation for screening guidelines. In addition, you will consider possibilities for furthering policy to promote population health related to this disease.
To prepare:
Review the four articles concerned with screening and public policy listed in this week’s Learning Resources. All four articles contain potentially controversial recommendations for screening and prevention.
Select one article on which to focus for this Discussion.
Analyze how the epidemiologic data could be used to formulate policy for improving population health.
By Day 3
Post a cohesive scholarly response that addresses the following:
Summarize the recommendations of your selected article. Discuss ethical considerations and whether or not you believe the recommendations are justified.
Describe the epidemiological evidence in support of your position.
Identify whether the screening program you review is population-based or high-risk based and how that influences your assessment.
How can the reported data be used to move policy forward for improving population health around this issue?
By Day 6
Respond to the postings of at least two colleagues who commented on an article you did not select. Review his or her summary and make an argument to support a different position. Again, cite epidemiological evidence that supports your opposing view.
Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the “Post to Discussion Question” link and then select “Create Thread” to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Submit, you cannot delete or edit your own posts, and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Submit!
The post NURS 8310 Discussion: Screening for Disease appeared first on NursingPaperSlayers.
Comments