The Journal of the American Dental Association
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 135, No 9, 1261-1267.
© 2004 American Dental Association

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by STAHL, S.
Right arrow Articles by BROWN, L. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by STAHL, S.
Right arrow Articles by BROWN, L. J.

TRENDS

JADA Continuing Education

The American Dental Association’s oral cancer campaign

The impact on consumers and dentists



SANDRA STAHL, LAWRENCE H. MESKIN, D.D.S., M.P.H., Ph.D. and L. JACKSON BROWN, D.D.S., Ph.D.


   ABSTRACT
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 METHODS AND MATERIALS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSION
 REFERENCES
 
Background. The ADA conducted a public service campaign in late 2001 to raise awareness of oral cancer and of the dentist’s role in early detection.

Methods. To gather information about the impact of this campaign, the ADA undertook two surveys. A telephone survey was conducted among 1,270 adult consumers, and a second survey was mailed to a national sample of 2,500 dentists.

Results. The majority of the consumers did not recognize the fact that dentists are responsible for examining their patients for oral cancer and that oral cancer claims more lives than melanoma or cervical cancer. The majority of dentists was aware of the ADA campaign and agreed that it helped raise the public’s awareness of oral cancer and the importance of early detection. As a result, more dentists said that they are likely to educate their patients about early detection, adjust their own practice routines to include discussion about the disease, and look more closely for small oral lesions and test them with the brush biopsy test.

Conclusions. The results of the survey of dentists demonstrated that the oral cancer awareness initiative sponsored by the ADA resulted in positive behavioral changes targeted toward the early detection of oral cancer.

Clinical Implications. Continued efforts to provide health education and health promotion interventions aimed at consumers and dentists invariably will result in the detection of oral cancers at early and curable stages.

Oral cancer constitutes the most life-threatening of all dental conditions. The five-year oral cancer survival rate of 50 percent is one of the lowest among all major cancers, and it has not improved in decades.1 With approximately 30,000 newly diagnosed oral cancer cases and 8,000 deaths annually, a vigorous agenda that includes education, policy and research initiatives is needed to enhance oral cancer prevention and early detection.2

Detecting oral cancer in its early stages dramatically affects survival rates compared with detecting it in later stages.3 For example, the five-year survival rate for early-stage cancer is more than 80 percent, but it is only 20 percent among people who are diagnosed with advanced stage cancer.4 As highlighted in the surgeon general’s Oral Health in America report, reducing deaths from oral cancer requires immediate attention. The report directs its focus on increasing the proportion of oral cancers detected at the earliest stage and increasing the proportion of adults who, in the past 12 months, report having had an examination to detect oral cancer.5

Consumers are largely unaware of oral cancer.

Overall, the public is ill-informed about risk factors for and signs and symptoms of oral cancers. The misinformation about oral cancer and its early detection among the general public may in part be due to the lack of coverage about oral cancer in the popular press.6 A study also has demonstrated that there is a significant dearth of educational materials about oral cancer and that the available educational materials designed to teach adults about the risks and symptoms of oral cancer and the need for an oral cancer examination are inadequate.7

Furthermore, health care providers have been remiss in providing oral cancer examinations and detecting early oral cancers.8 Many dentists either do not include oral cancer examinations in their routine practice or do not inform their patients that they are performing oral cancer screenings. Not surprisingly, only 13 percent of U.S. adults aged 40 years or older reported having had an oral cancer examination.9 Clearly, there is an urgent need for health education and health promotion interventions aimed at health care providers and the public to increase knowledge about oral cancer.

In 1996, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or CDC, convened a national conference—cosponsored by the National Institute of Dental Research of the National Institutes of Health and the ADA—to develop strategies for preventing and controlling oral cancer in the United States.10 One of the strategies proposed was to strengthen organizational approaches to reducing oral cancer by developing cooperative and collaborative arrangements involving commercial firms. The first such collaboration was formed in 2001 between the ADA and CDx Laboratories (Suffern, N.Y.), (formerly OralScan Laboratories, Suffern, N.Y.), which manufactures the OralCDx brush biopsy test. Together, they launched a national oral cancer public awareness campaign that emphasized the importance of early detection of oral cancer.

The campaign featured two advertisements (Figure 1Go) that appeared in 11 cities on billboards, bus shelters, commuter bulletins and taxi tops. Both advertisements displayed the ADA name, logo and Web site address and read: "It’s tiny now. Don’t let it grow up to be oral cancer. See your dentist. Testing is now painless." The seven-month program did not promote any specific products.



View larger version (57K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. The ADA-sponsored oral cancer awareness campaign signs featured on billboards, taxi tops, bus shelters and other outdoor venues.

 
The campaign also targeted dentists through ADA publications such as the ADA News and JADA, coverage in the lay print and broadcast media, an ADA patient brochure, and in-office materials, including posters, tent cards and statement stuffers, distributed by Sullivan-Schein Dental (a Henry Schein Company, Melville, N.Y.) to approximately 100,000 dentists.

The purpose of this article is to report the results of a survey that was conducted among consumers to assess their knowledge about oral cancer, and another survey of dentists to determine the impact of the ADA campaign.


   METHODS AND MATERIALS
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 METHODS AND MATERIALS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSION
 REFERENCES
 
The consumer survey and dental survey were conducted approximately four months after the oral cancer awareness campaign ended.

In the consumer survey, 1,270 adults chosen at random, nationwide, were interviewed by telephone. This survey consisted of questions about oral cancer facts (TableGo) and was not an attempt to determine if the ADA campaign had increased public awareness. Zogby International conducted the survey over a three-day period (Friday–Sunday), from its headquarters in Utica, N.Y. According to Zogby International, the survey had a margin of sampling error of ± 2.8 percent.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
TABLE CONSUMER TELEPHONE SURVEY AND RESPONSES.

 
In a dental survey conducted by the ADA Survey Center, 2,500 actively practicing dentists and members of the ADA, representing a random sample of dentists nationwide, were mailed a series of questions about oral cancer and the oral cancer awareness campaign. A follow-up mailing was sent out to all nonrespondents one month later. Data were collected over a three-month period.


   RESULTS
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 METHODS AND MATERIALS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSION
 REFERENCES
 
The results of the consumer survey are summarized in the tableGo (page, 1264). The survey revealed that only 12 percent of responders correctly identified the fact that oral cancer claims more lives each year than melanoma or cervical cancer. Those answering the question correctly were predominantly young adults, aged 18 to 29 years, and East Coast residents.

Sixty-one percent of respondents did not know that dentists look for oral cancer as part of a routine dental examination. College graduates, women and those with annual incomes greater than $50,000 were most likely to know that dentists examine patients for oral cancer.

Eighty-seven percent of responders agreed that knowing their dentist performs a routine oral cancer examination at every visit and uses a painless test on identified spots would make them feel that they are getting the best possible care. Those who disagreed with this statement were mostly people with annual incomes less than $15,000.

In the survey of dentists, 1,129 of 2,500 responses were received, which resulted in an adjusted response rate of 45.2 percent. A total of 73.2 percent of dentists reported being aware of the campaign, while only 26.8 percent reported having no knowledge of it. Female dentists, younger dentists, dentists living in the Middle Atlantic region and general practitioners were more likely to have heard of the campaign.

Of those dentists who were aware of the campaign, ADA News and JADA were the sources of information cited by the majority (Figure 2Go, page 1265). Younger dentists were more likely to report having seen the oral cancer campaign in outdoor advertising, while older dentists were more likely to report having seen the campaign on ADA.org.



View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. Percentage of dentists who reported having seen the oral cancer campaign promoted, by format.

 
A total of 83.4 percent of dentists agreed that the campaign had helped raise the public’s awareness of oral cancer and the importance of early detection. Furthermore, nearly 25 percent of dentists reported that they now pay more attention to oral lesions as a result of the campaign.

A total of 18.5 percent of dentists who were aware of the campaign had more frequent discussions with their patients about oral cancer than previously, while only 8.4 percent of dentists who were not aware of the campaign had more discussions with their patients than previously. Awareness of the oral cancer campaign also increased the frequency of patients requesting lesion checks and dentists paying more attention to the presence of oral lesions.

The most common change in practice made by dentists as a result of the campaign was an increased likelihood of informing a patient that an oral cancer examination was being performed (Figure 3Go, page 1265). A total of 39.6 percent of dentists reported that they were more likely to inform a patient of an oral cancer examination than they were previously. A total of 8.6 percent of dentists reported that they had detected more lesions in the past six months.



View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 3. Percentage of dentists who made changes in their practices in the six months before the survey.

 
Dentists who were aware of the oral cancer campaign also were more likely to use the brush biopsy test on lesions and to have their dental team point out more lesions for evaluation, compared with dentists who were not aware of the campaign.

A total of 63.4 percent of dentists reported that they evaluated small lesions more frequently because of the availability of the brush biopsy test. Furthermore, 33.7 percent of respondents who had used the brush biopsy test reported that they referred patients to an oral and maxillofacial surgeon more frequently than they had before use of the brush biopsy test (Figure 4Go, page 1266).



View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 4. Change in dentists’ frequency of referring patients to oral and maxillofacial surgeons after an abnormal brush biopsy test result.

 
The survey also revealed that 62.2 percent of dentists said that having a better understanding of what to look for would motivate them to test small, benign-appearing lesions routinely for early signs of oral cancer. Other motivating factors include encouragement from an oral surgeon and a professional association (Figure 5Go, page 1266).



View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 5. Motivators for testing small, benign-appearing lesions.

 
In evaluating the overall impact of the campaign on public awareness and the role of dentists in the early detection of oral cancer, the majority of dentists (77 percent) believed that the campaign had a "positive" or "very positive" impact on the role of the dentist in the early detection of oral cancer.


   DISCUSSION
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 METHODS AND MATERIALS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSION
 REFERENCES
 
The results of the survey of dentists suggest that an oral cancer awareness initiative sponsored by the ADA can result in behavioral changes that may affect the early detection of oral cancer. Dentists said they appreciated the positive attention the effort attracted to the profession, and they believed that the campaign boosted public awareness. More importantly, the survey results indicate that more dentists will be likely to educate their patients about early detection of oral cancer, adjust their own practice routines to include more discussion about the disease with their patients and to look more closely for lesions, and may seek additional opportunities to learn more about early oral cancer detection. These changes can have a dramatic effect on reducing the mortality rate of this disease, since detection of oral cancer during a routine screening examination on asymptomatic patients has been demonstrated recently to be associated with an earlier stage at diagnosis, and this is more likely to occur in a dental office than a medical office.11

Since the mid-1990s, direct-to-consumer, or DTC, campaigns about health issues and specific treatments have been implemented by the pharmaceutical industry, as well as other health-oriented organizations. These DTC campaigns have been shown to be an important source of information about treatment, options, benefits and risks to consumers in general, as well as to caregivers. In addition, DTC advertising also has facilitated discussions between health care providers and their patients, which can strengthen their relationships and prompt positive lifestyle changes.12

ADA’s oral cancer campaign, which may represent the dental profession’s first venture into DTC advertising and education since the fluoride education campaign, has proven that this educational effort could have similar positive effects. While it is difficult to conceive that any public health campaign planned for a national kick-off on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, would have more than a minimal chance for success considering the events of that day, the positive behavioral changes dentists reported six months after the campaign was launched indicate that the determination to proceed was wise. Although a recent study concluded that not enough dentists include comprehensive oral cancer screenings in their oral examinations, and that they are not explaining to patients what they are doing when they provide these screenings,13 the preliminary results of our survey provide hope that this trend is reversing.

Overall, 23.6 percent of dentists reported having used the brush biopsy test to help detect cancer and, furthermore, about 60 percent of dentists reported that they evaluated small lesions more frequently because of the brush biopsy test. Since precancers and early-stage oral cancers can appear identical to harmless-looking lesions, in the past many precancerous and cancerous lesions were overlooked and the correct diagnosis was delayed.14,15 As the brush biopsy test is indicated to test lesions that do not appear to be suspicious and would not have been referred for scalpel biopsy, identifying unsuspected cancers in their early stages can improve significantly the survival of patients with these types of lesions.

The findings of our survey demonstrate that general dentists are evaluating more small lesions using the brush biopsy test and referring more patients with oral lesions (those with abnormal brush biopsy test results) to oral surgeons. Before the advent of the brush biopsy test, many of these small lesions were watched repeatedly until they changed to more serious and advanced lesions. From our survey, it is clear that the availability of the brush biopsy test is having a positive impact on dentists who use it to evaluate small lesions, and such a change can only result in the detection of a greater number of early-stage cancers.

The consumer survey that followed the ADA campaign confirms the findings from previously published studies that showed that overall, the level of knowledge about risk factors for and signs and symptoms of oral cancers was low and the level of misinformation was high.13,16 Although the public is uninformed about oral cancer, as evidenced by the fact that more than 60 percent of the surveyed consumers were unaware that dentists were responsible for examining the mouth for oral cancer, our survey did reveal that supplementary information about the disease would be welcomed by consumers, as would additional communication from dentists. Although the impact of the ADA campaign on consumer awareness of oral cancer facts cannot be adequately measured as no precampaign survey was administered, it is clear that extensive public education about oral cancer should be provided in dental offices and clinics, as well as in mass media of all types.

The ADA received several complaints from dentists who objected to the image of a young woman with a small lesion on her tongue being used to depict a woman with oral cancer.17 These dentists suggested the young female image was not a proper representation of a high-risk oral cancer patient and instead, suggested the use of an image of an elderly man. Yet, recently published data support the decision to feature a young woman. Studies have shown that there has been a nearly fivefold increase in the incidence of oral cancer in young oral cancer patients (those younger than 40 years of age), many of whom had no traditional risk factors.1820 Furthermore, the incidence of oral cancer in women has increased significantly in the past 40 years; according to the CDC, the male to female ratio in 1950 was 6:1 and the ratio was 2:1 in 2002. The image used by the ADA oral cancer campaign captured the attention of both the consumer and the dental profession, and it created dialogue about a disease that had been ignored for far too long.

The concept of a public-private partnership to improve the health of those who "suffer disproportionately" from oral disease, as outlined in the surgeon general’s Oral Health in America report,5 has been boosted significantly by the success of the campaign. The unrestricted use of a grant supplied by CDx Laboratories to the ADA shows how a private corporation–professional organization partnership can expand and build on existing resources. Such combined efforts are more productive than that put forth by each organization individually.


   CONCLUSION
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 METHODS AND MATERIALS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSION
 REFERENCES
 
Results show that consumers are largely unaware of oral cancer, though they believe that when they receive early oral cancer detection examinations by their dentists, they are receiving the highest possible quality of care. As more than 80 percent of all dentists surveyed believed that the campaign helped raise the public’s awareness of oral cancer and the importance of early detection, additional resources are being devoted to expand on the ADA public awareness campaign for oral cancer. In June 2003, the ADA joined CDx Laboratories in launching another oral cancer educational campaign that emphasizes the increased trend in oral cancer in young patients and women and encourages oral cancer screenings for all new and recall patients, not just those at high risk.


   FOOTNOTES
 

Ms. Stahl is a principal in jacobstahl.inc, 315 East 65th St., New York, N.Y. 10021, e-mail "jacobstahl{at}aol.com". Address reprint requests to Ms. Stahl.


Dr. Meskin is a professor of dentistry and the director of continuing education, University of Colorado School of Dentistry, Denver.


Dr. Brown is associate executive director, Health Policy Resources Center, American Dental Association, Chicago.


The authors would like to thank Dr. Drore Eisen for reviewing the manuscript.


DISCLOSURE
Ms. Stahl served as a consultant to, or as vice president of marketing and communications for, CDx Laboratories (Suffern, N.Y.) from 2000 through July 2003.


Dr. Meskin is a member of CDx Laboratories’ (Suffern, N.Y.) advisory board.


   REFERENCES
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 METHODS AND MATERIALS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Funk GF, Karnell LH, Robinson RA, Zhen WK, Trask DK, Hoffman HT. Presentation, treatment, and outcome of oral cavity cancer: a National Cancer Data Base report. Head Neck 2002;24(2):165–80.[Medline]

  2. Horowitz AM, Goodman HS, Yellowitz JA, Nourjah PA. The need for health promotion in oral cancer prevention and early detection. J Public Health Dent 1996;56(6):319–30.[Medline]

  3. Ries LA, Miller AB, Hankey FB, Kosary CL, Harras A, Edwards BK, eds. SEER cancer statistics review, 1973–1991: tables and graphs. Bethesda, Md.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute; 1994. NIH publication 94-2789.

  4. Ries LAG, Kosary CL, Hankey BF, Miller BA, Clogg L, Edwards BK, eds. SEER cancer statistics review, 1973–1996. Bethesda, Md.: National Cancer Institute; 1999.

  5. United States Public Health Service, Office of the Surgeon General, National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research. Oral health in America: a report of the surgeon general. Rockville, Md.: Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Public Health Service; 2000.

  6. Canto MT, Kawaguchi Y, Horowitz AM. Coverage and quality of oral cancer information in the popular press: 1987–98. J Public Health Dent 1998;58(3):241–7.[Medline]

  7. Chung V, Horowitz AM, Canto MT, Siriphant P. Oral cancer educational materials for the general public: 1998. J Public Health Dent 2000;60(1):49–52.[Medline]

  8. Meskin LH. Do it or lose it. JADA 1997;128:1058, 1060.

  9. CDC reports low oral cancer screening rate. JADA 1994;125(6):670.

  10. Preventing and controlling oral and pharyngeal cancer. Recommendations from a National Strategic Planning Conference. MMWR Recomm Rep 1998;47(RR-14):1–12.[Medline]

  11. Holmes JD, Dierks EJ, Homer LD, Potter BE. Is detection of oral and oropharyngeal squamous cancer by a dental health care provider associated with a lower stage at diagnosis? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003;61(3):285–91.[Medline]

  12. Slaughter E. 7th annual survey: Consumer reaction to DTC advertising of prescription medicines. Rodale, Pa.: Prevention Magazine; 2003/2004.

  13. Horowitz AM, Canto MT, Child WL. Maryland adults’ perspectives on oral cancer prevention and early detection. JADA 2002;133(8):1058–63.

  14. Allison P, Franco E, Black M, Feine J. The role of professional diagnostic delays in the prognosis of upper aerodigestive tract carcinoma. Oral Oncol 1998;34(2):147–53.[Medline]

  15. Lydiatt DD. Cancer of the oral cavity and medical malpractice. Laryngoscope 2002;112(5):816–9.[Medline]

  16. Warnakulasuriya KA, Harris CK, Scarrott DM, et al. An alarming lack of public awareness towards oral cancer. Br Dent J 1999;187(6):319–22.[Medline]

  17. Potter TJ, Campbell JH, Summerlin DJ, Tomich CE, Lee M. Oral cancer campaign. JADA 2002;133:272, 274.

  18. Corcoran TP, Whiston DA. Oral cancer in young adults. JADA 2000;131(6):726.

  19. Lingen M, Sturgis EM, Kies MS. Squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in nonsmokers: clinical and biologic characteristics and implications for management. Curr Opin Oncol 2001;13(3):176–82.[Medline]

  20. Schantz SP, Yu GP. Head and neck cancer incidence trends in young Americans, 1973–1997, with a special analysis for tongue cancer. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;128(3):268–74.[Abstract/Free Full Text]





This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by STAHL, S.
Right arrow Articles by BROWN, L. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by STAHL, S.
Right arrow Articles by BROWN, L. J.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS