Article Figures & Data
Tables
- Table 1.
Mean Health Beliefs and Concern Scores for Colposcopy and Telecolposcopy Subjects
Cohorts Concern/Belief Colposcopy Telecolposcopy P Value* Concern about disease 3.3 (1.1) 3.3 (1.1) NS† Concern about procedure 3.2 (1.4) 3.4 (1.4) NS Concern about consequences 3.1 (1.2) 3.1 (1.2) NS Importance of appointment 3.6 (0.7) 3.6 (0.8) NS Self-blame for disease 2.9 (1.3) 2.8 (1.4) NS Self-control over disease 3.7 (1.2) 3.9 (1.2) NS Doctor has control over disease 4.1 (0.9) 4.2 (1.1) NS Pre-examination scores reported using a Likert scale (1 = not at all and 5 = extremely). Data are presented as mean (SD).
* Wilcoxon rank sum test.
† NS, not significant (p > .05).
- Table 2.
Mean Monitor and Blunter Coping Style Scores for Colposcopy and Telecolposcopy Cohorts
Mean Coping Style Score Cohort N Monitor Blunter Colposcopy 150 9.5 (3.5) 4.6 (2.6) Telecolposcopy 263 10.4 (3.5)* 4.8 (2.7)† Monitors attend to threatening cues; blunters avoid threatening cues. Scores >11 indicate high monitor or blunter, scores <11 indicate low monitor or blunter. Data are presented as mean (SD).
* Comparison of monitor scores between cohorts, P = .03, Wilcoxon rank sum test.
† Comparison of blunter scores between cohorts, P = .6, Wilcoxon rank sum test.
Cohorts Question Colposcopy Telecolposcopy P Value* Examination was painful 2.3 (1.2) 3.0 (1.3) <.001 Regular clinician can find abnormalities 3.1 (1.3) 3.5 (1.2) .005 Tele-/colposcopy examination saved me money 3.6 (1.0) 4.1 (1.0) <.001 Not satisfied with examination 1.7 (1.1) 1.9 (1.3) NS† Tele-/colposcopy improved diagnostic accuracy 4.4 (0.8) 4.4 (0.8) NS Getting cancer would be serious 4.7 (0.7) 4.7 (0.8) NS Tele-/colposcopy improved quality of my care 4.4 (0.9) 4.6 (0.7) NS Would not like name recognition by distant expert 3.1 (1.4) 2.8 (1.4) .04 Telecolposcopy saved/would save me time 4.0 (1.0) 4.3 (0.9) <.001 If clinician says telecolposcopy improves my care, I’ll do it 4.4 (0.7) 4.6 (0.6) <.001 Thoughts and fears of cervical cancer after told about abnormal Papanicolaou smear 4.0 (1.0) 4.2 (1.1) .02 Difficult to travel 1 to 4 hours for medical care 3.4 (1.4) 3.9 (1.3) <.001 Distant expert can see/could have seen my cervix as well as local clinician 3.5 (1.1) 4.1 (1.0) <.001 Recommend tele-/colposcopy to a friend 4.4 (0.7) 4.5 (0.7) NS Felt better about health after tele-/colposcopy examination 4.3 (0.9) 4.4 (0.8) NS Felt comfortable with tele-/colposcopy exam today 4.3 (0.9) 4.3 (0.8) NS Satisfied with tele-/colposcopy and care 4.6 (0.7) 4.6 (0.6) NS Confident distant expert/colposcopist was competent 4.6 (0.7) 4.6 (0.6) NS Felt distant expert/colposcopist concered about my health 4.5 (0.8) 4.5 (0.7) NS Postexamination scores reported using a Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree). Some questions slightly rephrased as appropriate for each situation. Data are presented as mean (SD).
* Wilcoxon rank sum test.
† NS, not significant (P > .05).
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- No citing articles found.