• Preventive medicine · May 2021

    Gaps between recommendations and their implementation: A register-based study of follow-up after abnormalities in cervical cancer screening.

    • Susanne Fogh Jørgensen, Berit Andersen, Matejka Rebolj, and Sisse Helle Njor.
    • Department of Public Health Programs, Randers Regional Hospital, Randers, Denmark; Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark. Electronic address: susanne.fogh@rm.dk.
    • Prev Med. 2021 May 1; 146: 106468106468.

    AbstractFollow-up after screen-detected abnormalities is crucial for the success of cervical cancer screening programs but is usually not closely monitored in official screening statistics. We determined how the follow-up deviated from the recommendations in the Danish organized program. Using Danish nationwide population-based registers, the follow-up pathways of 60,199 women aged 23-59 with non-negative screening samples from 2012 to 2014 were mapped until end of 2018. We studied the timeliness and appropriateness of follow-up tests after cervical cytology screening and the total resource use in accordance with the national recommendations. Regression analyses were used to determine variations in adherence according to age, provider type, region, and history of abnormalities. Among women referred for immediate colposcopy, 91.3% (95% CI: 90.9%-91.6%) attended within four months as recommended, whereas up to about half of the women with a recommendation for a repeat test received this test either too early or very late. Overall, only 43% (95% CI: 42.9%-43.7%) of women with non-negative screening tests received the recommended follow-up, whereas 18% (95% CI: 17.6%-18.2%) received more than was recommended, 35% (95% CI: 34.4%-35.1%) received some follow-up but less than recommended and 4% (95% CI: 3.9%-4.2%) were not followed up at all. These proportions varied by screening diagnosis, woman's age, type of health care provider, region, and history of abnormalities. On average, women underwent more tests of each type than recommended by the guidelines. Deviations from follow-up recommendations are very frequent even in organized cervical screening programs and should be routinely monitored by screening program statistics.Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.