Literature DB >> 16675004

Mammography screening rates decline: a person-time approach to evaluation.

Adrianne C Feldstein1, Thomas M Vogt, Mikel Aickin, Weiming R Hu.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Early detection through mammography can reduce breast cancer mortality. This cohort study evaluated trends in mammography screening, demonstrating a person-time approach.
METHODS: Included were women HMO members aged 50-69 from 1999 to 2002 who had not had breast cancer, dysplasia, fibrocystic disease, or implant. The amount of person-time covered by mammography as a percent of the time eligible for mammography screening (the prevention index (PI)) was calculated using electronic data. The denominator was the time during which the guidelines recommended that each participant should have been covered by a mammogram (every 24 months), excluding times when breast mass, abnormal mammogram, galactorrhea, or other breast disorders were under evaluation. The numerator was the time during which she was covered by a mammogram.
RESULTS: The number of women who contributed person-time increased from 43,283 to 49,512 and the number of screening mammograms declined from 23,586 to 22,719. The overall PI for screening mammography declined from 67.0 (67% of eligible person-time was appropriately covered by a mammogram) to 62.5, and the proportion of women with no coverage during a given year increased 16%.
CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a declining pattern of mammography screening using a person-time approach, a decline greater than that shown by methods that include diagnostic mammograms. The study highlights opportunities for use of the PI and quality improvement initiatives to improve breast cancer outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16675004     DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2006.03.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  6 in total

1.  Patient Barriers to Mammography Identified During a Reminder Program.

Authors:  Adrianne C Feldstein; Nancy Perrin; A Gabriela Rosales; Jennifer Schneider; Mary M Rix; Russell E Glasgow
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2011-01-28       Impact factor: 2.681

2.  Concordance of population-based estimates of mammography screening.

Authors:  Denise M Boudreau; Casey L Luce; Evette Ludman; Amy E Bonomi; Paul A Fishman
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2007-07-17       Impact factor: 4.018

3.  Breast cancer screening practices among first-generation immigrant muslim women.

Authors:  Memoona Hasnain; Usha Menon; Carol Estwing Ferrans; Laura Szalacha
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2014-05-27       Impact factor: 2.681

4.  Sensitivity of self-report mammography use in older women.

Authors:  Benjamin M Craig; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Susan T Vadaparampil
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 5.043

5.  Preventive screening of women who use complementary and alternative medicine providers.

Authors:  Lois Downey; Patrick T Tyree; William E Lafferty
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.681

6.  Adherence to long-term surveillance mammography among women with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery.

Authors:  Larissa Nekhlyudov; Laurel A Habel; Ninah S Achacoso; Inkyung Jung; Reina Haque; Laura C Collins; Stuart J Schnitt; Charles P Quesenberry; Suzanne W Fletcher
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-05-11       Impact factor: 44.544

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.