Literature DB >> 15316914

Interventions to improve follow-up of abnormal findings in cancer screening.

Roshan Bastani1, K Robin Yabroff, Ronald E Myers, Beth Glenn.   

Abstract

The potential reduction in morbidity and mortality through cancer screening cannot be realized without receipt of appropriate follow-up care for abnormalities identified via screening. In this paper, the authors critically examine the existing literature on correlates of receipt of appropriate follow-up care for screen-detected abnormalities, as well as the literature on interventions designed to increase rates of receipt of follow-up care. Lessons learned describe what is known and not known about factors that are related to or predict receipt of follow-up care. Similarly, effective interventions to increase follow-up are described and gaps identified. A conceptual model is developed that categorizes the health care system in the United States as comprising four levels: policy, practice, provider, and patient. Some patient-level factors that influence follow-up receipt are identified, but the lack of data severely limit the understanding of provider, practice, and policy-level correlates. The majority of intervention studies to increase follow-up receipt have focused on patient-level factors and have targeted follow-up of abnormal Papanicolaou smears. Insufficient information is available regarding the effectiveness of provider, practice, or policy-level interventions. Standard definitions of what constitutes appropriate follow-up are lacking, which severely limit comparability of findings across studies. The validity of various methods of obtaining outcome data has not been clearly established. More research is needed on interventions targeting provider, system, and policy-level factors, particularly interventions focusing on follow-up of colorectal and breast abnormalities. Standardization of definitions and measures is needed to facilitate comparisons across studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15316914      PMCID: PMC1811062          DOI: 10.1002/cncr.20506

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  90 in total

1.  Agreement between self-reported early cancer detection practices and medical audits among Hispanic and non-Hispanic white health plan members in northern California.

Authors:  R A Hiatt; E J Pérez-Stable; C Quesenberry; F Sabogal; R Otero-Sabogal; S J McPhee
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.018

2.  The Forsyth County Cervical Cancer Prevention Project--II. Compliance with screening follow-up of abnormal cervical smears.

Authors:  R Michielutte; M Dignan; J Bahnson; H B Wells
Journal:  Health Educ Res       Date:  1994-12

3.  PEAPS-Q: a questionnaire to measure the psychosocial effects of having an abnormal pap smear. Psychosocial Effects of Abnormal Pap Smears Questionnaire.

Authors:  A Bennetts; L Irwig; B Oldenburg; J M Simpson; P Mock; A Boyes; K Adams; E Weisberg; J Shelley
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Expanding access to cancer screening and clinical follow-up among the medically underserved.

Authors:  H P Freeman; B J Muth; J F Kerner
Journal:  Cancer Pract       Date:  1995 Jan-Feb

5.  Screening for colorectal neoplasia: physicians' adherence to complete diagnostic evaluation.

Authors:  R E Myers; A M Balshem; T A Wolf; E A Ross; L Millner
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  Using reminder systems to improve Papanicolaou test follow-up. An example of continuous quality improvement.

Authors:  G M Eilers; T K Swanson
Journal:  Arch Fam Med       Date:  1993-11

7.  Patient notification and follow-up of abnormal test results. A physician survey.

Authors:  E A Boohaker; R E Ward; J E Uman; B D McCarthy
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1996-02-12

8.  Psychological reactions in men screened for prostate cancer.

Authors:  O Gustafsson; T Theorell; U Norming; A Perski; M Ohström; C R Nyman
Journal:  Br J Urol       Date:  1995-05

9.  Improving compliance among women with abnormal Papanicolaou smears.

Authors:  E D Paskett; K C Phillips; M E Miller
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Follow-up of abnormal Papanicolaou smears among women of different races.

Authors:  P Carey; D K Gjerdingen
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 0.493

View more
  34 in total

1.  Determinants of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Follow-Up And Invasive Cervical Cancer Among Uninsured and Underinsured Women in New Jersey.

Authors:  Jennifer Tsui; Adana A Llanos; Michelle Doose; David Rotter; Antoinette Stroup
Journal:  J Health Care Poor Underserved       Date:  2019

2.  Impact of GP reminders on follow-up of abnormal cervical cytology: a before-after study in Danish general practice.

Authors:  Bettina Kjær Kristiansen; Berit Andersen; Flemming Bro; Hans Svanholm; Peter Vedsted
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  Sociodemographic factors associated with cervical cancer screening and follow-up of abnormal results.

Authors:  Laurie Elit; Monika Krzyzanowska; Refik Saskin; Lisa Barbera; Asma Razzaq; Aisha Lofters; Naira Yeritsyan; Arlene Bierman
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 4.  Factors in quality care--the case of follow-up to abnormal cancer screening tests--problems in the steps and interfaces of care.

Authors:  Jane Zapka; Stephen H Taplin; Rebecca Anhang Price; Caroline Cranos; Robin Yabroff
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2010

5.  Using a multifaceted approach to improve the follow-up of positive fecal occult blood test results.

Authors:  Hardeep Singh; Himabindu Kadiyala; Gayathri Bhagwath; Anila Shethia; Hashem El-Serag; Annette Walder; Maria E Velez; Laura A Petersen
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 10.864

6.  Physician reminders to promote surveillance colonoscopy for colorectal adenomas: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  John Z Ayanian; Thomas D Sequist; Alan M Zaslavsky; Richard S Johannes
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-04-02       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Impact of patient navigation on cancer diagnostic resolution among Northwest Tribal communities.

Authors:  Victoria Warren-Mears; Jenine Dankovchik; Meena Patil; Rongwei Fu
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 2.037

8.  Peer navigation improves diagnostic follow-up after breast cancer screening among Korean American women: results of a randomized trial.

Authors:  Annette E Maxwell; Angela M Jo; Catherine M Crespi; Madhuri Sudan; Roshan Bastani
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2010-07-31       Impact factor: 2.506

9.  A multilevel research perspective on cancer care delivery: the example of follow-up to an abnormal mammogram.

Authors:  Stephen H Taplin; K Robin Yabroff; Jane Zapka
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2012-08-21       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  Improving follow-up of abnormal cancer screens using electronic health records: trust but verify test result communication.

Authors:  Hardeep Singh; Lindsey Wilson; Laura A Petersen; Mona K Sawhney; Brian Reis; Donna Espadas; Dean F Sittig
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2009-12-09       Impact factor: 2.796

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.