Literature DB >> 15167328

Effectiveness and efficiency of opportunistic cervical cancer screening: comparison with organized screening.

Peymané Adab1, Sarah M McGhee, Jana Yanova, Chit Ming Wong, Anthony J Hedley.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Several countries have adopted nationally organized cervical screening programs, but many continue with opportunistic screening. Comparison of the effectiveness and efficiency of the 2 systems is important for informing policy.
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of an opportunistic cervical screening system, and to compare this with what could be achieved through an organized program. RESEARCH
DESIGN: We propose a model for estimating the effectiveness and efficiency of opportunistic screening systems and demonstrate it using data from a cross-sectional study of 1826 women in Hong Kong. We estimated the coverage and frequency of screening and used this to estimate effectiveness (number of cases of invasive cervical cancer potentially prevented) and efficiency (tests per case prevented) of the current system. Similar estimates were made for various organized programs with different screening intervals and coverage.
RESULTS: Ever screening coverage in this opportunistic system was 44%, resulting in 26% to 31% reduction in potential new cases (n = 144-183). Compared with this, a 3-yearly or 5-yearly screening policy aiming for 80% coverage would prevent an additional 46% (equivalent to 254 new cases out of a population of 2.3 million women per year) and 41% (222 per year), respectively. This could be achieved with more efficient use of resources, reducing the number of tests per case prevented from 2018 to 1545 and 1007, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: At best, the effectiveness of this opportunistic system is equivalent to an organized program with 10-yearly screening and 50% coverage but at much greater cost. Poor coverage and over screening of a minority of women contributes to its inefficiency.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15167328     DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000128007.04494.29

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  10 in total

1.  Age-period-cohort analysis of cervical cancer incidence in Hong Kong from 1972 to 2001 using maximum likelihood and Bayesian methods.

Authors:  Gabriel M Leung; Pauline P S Woo; Sarah M McGhee; Annie N Y Cheung; Susan Fan; Oscar Mang; Thuan Q Thach; Hextan Y S Ngan
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  Cytology use for cervical cancer screening in Portugal: results from the 2005/2006 National Health Survey.

Authors:  Mariana Oliveira; Bárbara Peleteiro; Nuno Lunet
Journal:  Eur J Public Health       Date:  2013-06-20       Impact factor: 3.367

3.  The frequency and pattern of female genital tract malignancies at the university of Nigeria teaching hospital, enugu, Nigeria.

Authors:  Tc Okeke; N Onah; Lc Ikeako; Cct Ezenyeaku
Journal:  Ann Med Health Sci Res       Date:  2013-07

4.  Opportunistic cervical cancer screening of women visitors at a trade fair in India.

Authors:  Roopa Hariprasad; Pushpa Sodhani; Sanjay Gupta; Latha Sriram; Deepika Saraf; Suman Bodat; Rajeev Kumar; Preetha Rajaraman; Ravi Mehrotra
Journal:  Indian J Med Res       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 2.375

Review 5.  Cancer Screening Awareness and Practice in a Middle Income Country; A Systematic Review from Iran

Authors:  Azam Majidi; Somayye Majidi; Somayye Salimzadeh; Maryam Khazaee- Pool; Alireza Sadjadi; Hamideh Salimzadeh; Alireza Delavari
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2017-12-28

6.  Organized screening programmes for breast and cervical cancer in 17 EU countries: trajectories of attendance rates.

Authors:  Maria Michela Gianino; Jacopo Lenzi; Marco Bonaudo; Maria Pia Fantini; Roberta Siliquini; Walter Ricciardi; Gianfranco Damiani
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 3.295

Review 7.  Facilitating Factors and Barriers of Women's Cancer Screening in Iran: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Sulmaz Ghahramani; Hengameh Kasraei; Saeed Shahabi; Kamran Bagheri Lankarani
Journal:  Int J Prev Med       Date:  2020-12-11

8.  Historical Analysis of the Brazilian Cervical Cancer Screening Program from 2006 to 2013: A Time for Reflection.

Authors:  Ricardo Filipe Alves Costa; Adhemar Longatto-Filho; Céline Pinheiro; Luiz Carlos Zeferino; José Humberto Fregnani
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-09-24       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Estimation of the individual residual risk of cervical cancer after vaccination with the nonavalent HPV vaccine.

Authors:  Karl-Ulrich Petry; Kaatje Bollaerts; Paolo Bonanni; Margaret Stanley; Rosybel Drury; Elmar Joura; Susanne K Kjaer; Chris J L M Meijer; Didier Riethmuller; Benoit Soubeyrand; Pierre Van Damme; Xavier Bosch
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2018-05-24       Impact factor: 3.452

10.  Level and Factors Associated with Participation in Population-Based Cancer Screening in Safranbolu District of Karabuk, Turkey.

Authors:  Raziye Özdemir; Fatma TÜrkmen Çevik; Duygu Kes; Merve Karacali; Simge ÖzgÜner
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 1.429

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.