Literature DB >> 15694900

Screening for cervical cancer: will women accept less?

Brenda E Sirovich1, Steven Woloshin, Lisa M Schwartz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: U.S. professional organizations increasingly agree that most women require Papanicolaou smear screening every 2 to 3 years rather than annually and that most elderly women may stop screening. We sought to describe the attitudes of women in the United States toward less intense screening, specifically, less frequent screening and eventual cessation of screening.
METHODS: We conducted a random-digit-dialing telephone survey of women in 2002 (response rate of 75% among eligible women reached by telephone). A nationally representative sample of 360 women aged 40 years or older with no history of cancer was surveyed about their acceptance of less intense screening.
RESULTS: Almost all women aged 40 years or older (99%) had had at least one Pap smear; most (59%) were screened annually. When women were asked to choose their preferred frequency for screening, 75% preferred screening at least annually (12% chose screening every 6 months). Less than half (43%) had heard of recommendations advocating less frequent screening. When advised of such recommendations, half of all women believed that they were based on cost. Sixty-nine percent said that they would try to continue being screened annually even if their doctors recommended less frequent screening and advised them of comparable benefits. Only 35% of women thought that there might come a time when they would stop getting Pap smears; of these, almost half would not stop until after age 80 years. The strongest predictor of reluctance to reduce the frequency of screening was a belief that cost was the basis of current screening frequency recommendations.
CONCLUSION: Most women in the United States prefer annual Pap smears and are resistant to the idea of less intense screening. Concern that cost considerations rather than evidence form the basis of screening recommendations may partly explain women's reluctance to accept less intense screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15694900     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2004.08.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med        ISSN: 0002-9343            Impact factor:   4.965


  24 in total

1.  [Over-attendance at paediatrics and the child care system].

Authors:  M Seguí
Journal:  Aten Primaria       Date:  2006-02-15       Impact factor: 1.137

2.  Patient knowledge and beliefs as barriers to extending cervical cancer screening intervals in Federally Qualified Health Centers.

Authors:  Nikki A Hawkins; Vicki B Benard; April Greek; Katherine B Roland; Diane Manninen; Mona Saraiya
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2013-09-05       Impact factor: 4.018

3.  Beliefs about cervical cancer screening among Turkish married women.

Authors:  Melek Nihal Esin; Serap Bulduk; Aysun Ardic
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.037

4.  What Australian women want and when they want it: cervical screening testing preferences, decision-making styles and information needs.

Authors:  Mbathio Dieng; Lyndal Trevena; Robin M Turner; Monika Wadolowski; Kirsten McCaffery
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-07-04       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer.

Authors:  Debbie Saslow; Diane Solomon; Herschel W Lawson; Maureen Killackey; Shalini L Kulasingam; Joanna Cain; Francisco A R Garcia; Ann T Moriarty; Alan G Waxman; David C Wilbur; Nicolas Wentzensen; Levi S Downs; Mark Spitzer; Anna-Barbara Moscicki; Eduardo L Franco; Mark H Stoler; Mark Schiffman; Philip E Castle; Evan R Myers
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 508.702

6.  Recommendations on screening for cervical cancer.

Authors:  James Dickinson; Eva Tsakonas; Sarah Conner Gorber; Gabriela Lewin; Elizabeth Shaw; Harminder Singh; Michel Joffres; Richard Birtwhistle; Marcello Tonelli; Verna Mai; Meg McLachlin
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2013-01-07       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  Cost is a barrier to widespread use of liquid-based cytology for cervical cancer screening in Korea.

Authors:  Hyun Hoon Chung; Jae Weon Kim; Soon-Beom Kang
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.153

8.  Adherence to the 2012 national cervical cancer screening guidelines: a pilot study.

Authors:  Deanna G K Teoh; Amity E Marriott; Rachel Isaksson Vogel; Ryan T Marriott; Charles W Lais; Levi S Downs; Shalini L Kulasingam
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-06-30       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Does patient health and hysterectomy status influence cervical cancer screening in older women?

Authors:  Helen I Meissner; Jasmin A Tiro; David Haggstrom; Grace Lu-Yao; Nancy Breen
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-09-11       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Market survey predictions on the future of US Pap testing.

Authors:  R Marshall Austin; Barbara Benstein; Joel Bentz; Sandra Bigner; Gregory G Freund; Gregory La Rocco; Ibrahim Ramzy; Lynnette Savaloja; Vinod B Shidham
Journal:  Cytojournal       Date:  2009-09-18       Impact factor: 2.091

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.