BMC Public Health (Aug 2024)

Adherence to national guidelines for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings in Japanese workplaces: a survey-based classification of enterprises’ practices into “overscreening,” “underscreening,” and “guideline-adherence screening”

  • Masanari Minamitani,
  • Masayuki Tatemichi,
  • Tomoya Mukai,
  • Atsuto Katano,
  • Shingo Ohira,
  • Keiichi Nakagawa

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19775-1
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 1
pp. 1 – 11

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Workplace cancer screening programs are determined as part of an employee’s benefits package and health checkups are perceived positively. However, the current status of workplace cancer screening programs in Japan is unavailable. This study aimed to assess the adherence to national guidelines for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings in the workplace among Japanese enterprises and identify factors associated with excessive or inadequate screenings. Methods A cross-sectional study design was employed. Data were obtained from a survey conducted by the “Corporate Action to Promote Cancer Control” between November and December 2022 among registered partner enterprises in Japan. The survey included questions on background characteristics, cancer screening practices, and intervention approaches. The analysis included 432 enterprises that provided complete responses regarding colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings. Results The guideline-adherence rates for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings in the workplace were 12.7%, 3.0%, and 8.8%, respectively. Enterprises had lower adherence to screening guidelines than local governments. Colorectal (70.8%) and breast (67.1%) cancer screenings were predominantly categorized as “overscreening” and cervical (60.6%) cancer screening, as “underscreening.” Factors such as enterprise scale, health insurance associations, and the number of interventional approaches were significantly associated with increased “overscreening” (101–1000: β = 0.13, p = 0.01; ≥ 1000: β = 0.17, p < 0.01; health insurance association: β = 0.23, p < 0.01; and approaches: β = 0.42, p < 0.01) and reduced “underscreening” (101–1000: β = -0.13, p = 0.01; ≥ 1000: β = -0.17, p < 0.01; health insurance association: β = -0.18, p < 0.01; and approaches: β = -0.48, p < 0.01). Conclusion Adherence to national guidelines for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings in the workplace was suboptimal among Japanese enterprises. Therefore, appropriate cancer screening measures and interventions to ensure guideline adherence and optimization of screening benefits while minimizing potential harms should be expeditiously implemented.

Keywords