BMC Cancer (Dec 2017)

Process evaluation of health fairs promoting cancer screenings

  • Cam Escoffery,
  • Shuting Liang,
  • Kirsten Rodgers,
  • Regine Haardoerfer,
  • Grace Hennessy,
  • Kendra Gilbertson,
  • Natalia I. Heredia,
  • Leticia A. Gatus,
  • Maria E. Fernandez

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3867-3
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 17, no. 1
pp. 1 – 12

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Low income and uninsured individuals often have lower adherence to cancer screening for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer. Health fairs are a common community outreach strategy used to provide cancer-related health education and services. Methods This study was a process evaluation of seven health fairs focused on cancer screening across the U.S. We conducted key-informant interviews with the fair coordinator and conducted baseline and follow-up surveys with fair participants to describe characteristics of participants as well as their experiences. We collected baseline data with participants at the health fairs and telephone follow-up surveys 6 months following the fair. Results Attendance across the seven health fairs ranged from 41 to 212 participants. Most fairs provided group or individual education, print materials and cancer screening during the event. Overall, participants rated health fairs as very good and participants reported that the staff was knowledgeable and that they liked the materials distributed. After the fairs, about 60% of participants, who were reached at follow-up, had read the materials provided and had conversations with others about cancer screening, and 41% talked to their doctors about screening. Based on findings from evaluation including participant data and coordinator interviews, we describe 6 areas in planning for health fairs that may increase their effectiveness. These include: 1) use of a theoretical framework for health promotion to guide educational content and activities provided, 2) considering the community characteristics, 3) choosing a relevant setting, 4) promotion of the event, 5) considerations of the types of services to deliver, and 6) evaluation of the health fair. Conclusions The events reported varied in reach and the participants represented diverse races and lower income populations overall. Most health fairs offered education, print materials and onsite cancer screening. Participants reported general satisfaction with these events and were motivated through their participation to read educational materials or discuss screening with providers. Public health professionals can benefit from this process evaluation and recommendations for designing and evaluating health fairs.

Keywords