A Mixed Method Research to Identify Perceived Reasons and Solutions for Low Uptake of Cervical Cancer Screening in Urban Families of Bhopal Region

Table 10

Perceived solutions for “resource constrains and affordability issues.”

Perceived solutions	Frequency (%)	Average rank	Salience
(i) Subsidized treatment for BPL card holders	40	1.5	0.328
(ii) Free screening camps	26.7	1.5	0.2
(iii) Increasing staff and equipment in government hospitals	26.7	2	0.189
(iv) Subsidized vaccine for BPL card holders	20	1	0.2
(v) Separate screening OPDs at every government hospital	13.3	3	0.044
(vi) Mass vaccination at low cost	13.3	1.5	0.1
(vii) Provision for screening at primary health centers	13.3	1	0.133
(viii) Training nurses especially for Pap smear	13.3	3.5	0.039
(ix) ASHA and USHA workers trained to do screening at village	6.7	1	0.067
(x) Self-screening kits can be developed	6.7	2	0.044
(xi) Allowing payment of vaccine in installments	6.7	2	0.033
(xii) Discounted treatment by pharmaceutical companies	6.7	2	0.033
(xiii) Government schemes to promote cancer screening at every level	6.7	2	0.044
(xiv) Health camps aiming at high-risk population	6.7	1	0.067
(xv) Certain days of the year should be allotted for cervical cancer screening on a mass scale (like pulse polio)	6.7	3	0.022
(xvi) Government policies for cost control in private hospitals	6.7	3	0.022
(xvii) Educating about low cost of screening and treatment at government hospitals	6.7	1	0.067