Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Time and Distance Barriers to Mammography Facilities in the Atlanta Metropolitan Area

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Community Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To a great extent, research on geographic accessibility to mammography facilities has focused on urban–rural differences. Spatial accessibility within urban areas can nonetheless pose a challenge, especially for minorities and low-income urban residents who are more likely to depend on public transportation. To examine spatial and temporal accessibility to mammography facilities in the Atlanta metropolitan area by public and private transportation, we built a multimodal transportation network model including bus and rail routes, bus and rail stops, transfers, walk times, and wait times. Our analysis of travel times from the population-weighted centroids of the 282 census tracts in the 2-county area to the nearest facility found that the median public transportation time was almost 51 minutes. We further examined public transportation travel times by levels of household access to a private vehicle. Residents in tracts with the lowest household access to a private vehicle had the shortest travel times, suggesting that facilities were favorably located for women who have to use public transportation. However, census tracts with majority non-Hispanic black populations had the longest travel times for all levels of vehicle availability. Time to the nearest mammography facility would not pose a barrier to women who had access to a private vehicle. This study adds to the literature demonstrating differences in spatial accessibility to health services by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic characteristics. Ameliorating spatial inaccessibility represents an opportunity for intervention that operates at the population level.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Berry, D. A., Cronin, K. A., Plevritis, S. K., Fryback, D. G., Clarke, L., Zelen, M., Mandelblatt, J. S., Yakovlev, A. Y., Habbema, J. D., Feuer, E. J., Cancer, I., and Surveillance Modeling Network, C. (2005). Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med 353, 1784–1792.

  2. Kalager, M., Zelen, M., Langmark, F., & Adami, H. O. (2010). Effect of screening mammography on breast-cancer mortality in Norway. New England Journal of Medicine, 363, 1203–1210.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Mandelblatt, J. S., Cronin, K. A., Bailey, S., Berry, D. A., de Koning, H. J., Draisma, G., et al. (2009). Effects of mammography screening under different screening schedules: Model estimates of potential benefits and harms. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151, 738–747.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. US Preventive Services Task Force. (2009). Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151, 716–726. W-236.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Lee, C. H., Dershaw, D. D., Kopans, D., Evans, P., Monsees, B., Monticciolo, D., et al. (2010). Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the use of mammography, breast MRI, breast ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer. Journal of the American College of Radiology, 7, 18–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Smith, R. A., Cokkinides, V., & Brawley, O. W. (2009). Cancer screening in the United States, 2009: A review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and issues in cancer screening. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 59, 27–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. US Preventive Services Task Force. (2002). Screening for breast cancer: United States Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 137(Part 1), 344–346.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ryerson, A. B., Miller, J. W., Eheman, C. R., Leadbetter, S., & White, M. C. (2008). Recent trends in U.S. mammography use from 2000-2006: A population-based analysis. Preventive Medicine, 47, 477–482.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sabatino, S. A., Coates, R. J., Uhler, R. J., Breen, N., Tangka, F., & Shaw, K. M. (2008). Disparities in mammography use among US women aged 40–64 years, by race, ethnicity, income, and health insurance status, 1993 and 2005. Medical Care, 46, 692–700.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Barr, J. K., Franks, A. L., Lee, N. C., Herther, P., & Schachter, M. (2001). Factors associated with continued participation in mammography screening. Preventive Medicine, 33, 661–667.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bobo, J. K., Shapiro, J. A., Schulman, J., & Wolters, C. L. (2004). On-schedule mammography rescreening in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, 13, 620–630.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Coughlin, S. S., Leadbetter, S., Richards, T., & Sabatino, S. A. (2008). Contextual analysis of breast and cervical cancer screening and factors associated with health care access among United States women, 2002. Social Science and Medicine, 66, 260–275.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Levy-Storms, L., Bastani, R., & Reuben, D. B. (2004). Predictors of varying levels of nonadherence to mammography screening in older women. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 52, 768–773.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Quinley, J., Mahotiere, T., Messina, C. R., Lee, T. K., & Mikail, C. (2004). Mammography-facility-based patient reminders and repeat mammograms for Medicare in New York State. Preventive Medicine, 38, 20–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sambamoorthi, U., & McAlpine, D. D. (2003). Racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and access disparities in the use of preventive services among women. Preventive Medicine, 37, 475–484.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Schueler, K. M., Chu, P. W., & Smith-Bindman, R. (2008). Factors associated with mammography utilization: A systematic quantitative review of the literature. J Womens Health (Larchmt), 17, 1477–1498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Task Force on Community Preventive, S. (2008). Recommendations for client- and provider-directed interventions to increase breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35, S21–S25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ward, E., Halpern, M., Schrag, N., Cokkinides, V., DeSantis, C., Bandi, P., et al. (2008). Association of insurance with cancer care utilization and outcomes. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 58, 9–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Penchansky, R., & Thomas, J. W. (1981). The concept of access: Definition and relationship to consumer satisfaction. Medical Care, 19, 127–140.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Elkin, E. B., Ishill, N. M., Snow, J. G., Panageas, K. S., Bach, P. B., Liberman, L., et al. (2010). Geographic access and the use of screening mammography. Medical Care, 48, 349–356.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Elting, L. S., Cooksley, C. D., Bekele, B. N., Giordano, S. H., Shih, Y. C. T., Lovell, K. K., et al. (2009). Mammography capacity: Impact on screening rates and breast cancer stage at diagnosis. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 37, 102–108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Athas, W. F., Adams-Cameron, M., Hunt, W. C., Amir-Fazli, A., & Key, C. R. (2000). Travel distance to radiation therapy and receipt of radiotherapy following breast-conserving surgery. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 92, 269–271.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Celaya, M. O., Rees, J. R., Gibson, J. J., Riddle, B. L., & Greenberg, E. R. (2006). Travel distance and season of diagnosis affect treatment choices for women with early-stage breast cancer in a predominantly rural population (United States). Cancer Causes and Control, 17, 851–856.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Doescher, M. P., & Jackson, J. E. (2009). Trends in cervical and breast cancer screening practices among women in rural and urban areas of the United States. J Public Health Manag Pract, 15, 200–209.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Engelman, K. K., Hawley, D. B., Gazaway, R., Mosier, M. C., Ahluwalia, J. S., & Ellerbeck, E. F. (2002). Impact of geographic barriers on the utilization of mammograms by older rural women. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 50, 62–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hyndman, J. C., Holman, C. D., & Dawes, V. P. (2000). Effect of distance and social disadvantage on the response to invitations to attend mammography screening. Journal of Medical Screening, 7, 141–145.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Larson, S., & Correa-de-Araujo, R. (2006). Preventive health examinations: A comparison along the rural-urban continuum. Womens Health Issues, 16, 80–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Meden, T., St John-Larkin, C., Hermes, D., & Sommerschield, S. (2002). MSJAMA. Relationship between travel distance and utilization of breast cancer treatment in rural northern Michigan. JAMA, 287, 111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Nattinger, A. B., Kneusel, R. T., Hoffmann, R. G., & Gilligan, M. A. (2001). Relationship of distance from a radiotherapy facility and initial breast cancer treatment. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 93, 1344–1346.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Rushton, G. (1999). Methods to evaluate geographic access to health services. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 5, 93–100.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. U S Census Bureau. Census 2000 Summary File 3 (SF3)—United States. Sample data Technical Documentation. http://Factfinder.census.gov.

  32. Zenk, S. N., Tarlov, E., & Sun, J. (2006). Spatial equity in facilities providing low- or no-fee screening mammography in Chicago neighborhoods. J Urban Health, 83, 195–210.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Meersman, S. C., Breen, N., Pickle, L. W., Meissner, H. I., & Simon, P. (2009). Access to mammography screening in a large urban population: A multi-level analysis. Cancer Causes and Control, 20, 1469–1482.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Gumpertz, M. L., Pickle, L. W., Miller, B. A., & Bell, B. S. (2006). Geographic patterns of advanced breast cancer in Los Angeles: Associations with biological and sociodemographic factors (United States). Cancer Causes and Control, 17, 325–339.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Dai, D. (2010). Black residential segregation, disparities in spatial access to health care facilities, and late-stage breast cancer diagnosis in metropolitan Detroit. Health & Place, 16, 1038–1052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. McLafferty, S., & Wang, F. (2009). Rural reversal? Cancer, 115, 2755–2764.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Sanchez, K. M. (1999). The connection between public transport and employment: The cases of Portland adn Atlanta. Journal of the American Planning Association, 65, 284–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Wang, F. (2006). Quantitative methods and applications in GIS. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  39. US Department of Transportation. (2009). Manual on uniform traffic control devices, 2009 edition. Washington, DC: Federal highway Administration.

    Google Scholar 

  40. St. Jacques, K., & Levinson, H. S. (1997). Operational Analysis of Bus Lanes on Arterials. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

  41. MARTA Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority. Schedules and Maps. http://www.itsmarta.com/ne-nor.aspx. Accessed 2 Nov 2010.

  42. Wright, J. K. (1936). A method of mapping densities of population: With Cape Cod as an example. The Geographical Review, 26, 103–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lovett, A., Haynes, R., Sunnenberg, G., & Gale, S. (2002). Car travel time and accessibility by bus to general practitioner services: A study using patient registers and GIS. Social Science and Medicine, 55, 97–111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Atlanta Regional Commission. State of the Atlanta Region; By the Numbers. Regional Snapshot, Atlanta, GA. http://atlantaregional.com/info-center/arc-newsletters/regional-snapshots/Regional-Snapshots. Accessed 3 January 2011.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Erin Justin, Senior Program Officer at the CDC Foundation, for project management assistance and Efomo Woghiren at the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry for assistance in building the transportation network model. This study was supported by a grant from Susan G. Komen for Cure through the CDC Foundation.

Disclaimer

The findings and conclusions of this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucy A. Peipins.

Additional information

This manuscript was written in the course of employment by the United States Government and is not subject to copyright in the United States.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Peipins, L.A., Graham, S., Young, R. et al. Time and Distance Barriers to Mammography Facilities in the Atlanta Metropolitan Area. J Community Health 36, 675–683 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-011-9359-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-011-9359-5

Keywords

Navigation