BACKGROUND: Patients and physicians strongly endorse the importance of preventive or periodic health examinations (PHEs). However, the extent to which PHEs contribute to the delivery of cancer screening is uncertain. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study, we determined the association between receipt of a PHE and cancer testing in a population-based sample of enrollees in a Washington State health plan who were aged 52 to 78 years and eligible for colorectal, breast, or prostate cancer screening in 2002-2003 (N = 64 288). Outcomes included completion of any colorectal cancer testing (fecal occult blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, or barium enema), screening mammography, and prostate-specific antigen testing. RESULTS: More than half (52.4%) of the enrollees received a PHE during the study period. After adjusting for demographics, comorbidity, number of outpatient visits, and historical preventive service use before January 1, 2002, receipt of a PHE was significantly associated with completion of colorectal cancer testing (incidence difference, 40.4% [95% confidence interval (CI), 39.4%-41.3%]; relative incidence, 3.47 [95% CI, 3.34-3.59]), screening mammography [incidence difference, 14.2% [95% CI, 12.7%-15.7%]; relative incidence, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.20-1.25]), and prostate-specific antigen testing (incidence difference, 39.4% [95% CI, 38.3%-40.5%]; relative incidence, 3.06 [95% CI, 2.95-3.18]). CONCLUSIONS: Among managed care enrollees eligible for cancer screening, PHE receipt is associated with completion of colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer testing. In similar populations, the PHE may serve as a clinically important forum for the promotion of evidence-based colorectal cancer and breast cancer screening and of screening with relatively less empirical support, such as prostate cancer screening.
BACKGROUND:Patients and physicians strongly endorse the importance of preventive or periodic health examinations (PHEs). However, the extent to which PHEs contribute to the delivery of cancer screening is uncertain. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study, we determined the association between receipt of a PHE and cancer testing in a population-based sample of enrollees in a Washington State health plan who were aged 52 to 78 years and eligible for colorectal, breast, or prostate cancer screening in 2002-2003 (N = 64 288). Outcomes included completion of any colorectal cancer testing (fecal occult blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, or barium enema), screening mammography, and prostate-specific antigen testing. RESULTS: More than half (52.4%) of the enrollees received a PHE during the study period. After adjusting for demographics, comorbidity, number of outpatient visits, and historical preventive service use before January 1, 2002, receipt of a PHE was significantly associated with completion of colorectal cancer testing (incidence difference, 40.4% [95% confidence interval (CI), 39.4%-41.3%]; relative incidence, 3.47 [95% CI, 3.34-3.59]), screening mammography [incidence difference, 14.2% [95% CI, 12.7%-15.7%]; relative incidence, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.20-1.25]), and prostate-specific antigen testing (incidence difference, 39.4% [95% CI, 38.3%-40.5%]; relative incidence, 3.06 [95% CI, 2.95-3.18]). CONCLUSIONS: Among managed care enrollees eligible for cancer screening, PHE receipt is associated with completion of colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer testing. In similar populations, the PHE may serve as a clinically important forum for the promotion of evidence-based colorectal cancer and breast cancer screening and of screening with relatively less empirical support, such as prostate cancer screening.
Authors: R Ballard-Barbash; S H Taplin; B C Yankaskas; V L Ernster; R D Rosenberg; P A Carney; W E Barlow; B M Geller; K Kerlikowske; B K Edwards; C F Lynch; N Urban; C A Chrvala; C R Key; S P Poplack; J K Worden; L G Kessler Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 1997-10 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Patricia A Ganz; Melissa M Farmer; Michael J Belman; Christine A Garcia; Leanne Streja; Allen J Dietrich; Charlotte Winchell; Roshan Bastani; Katherine L Kahn Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-11-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Stephenie C Lemon; Jane G Zapka; Barbara Estabrook; Stephen Erban; Roger Luckmann Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Chyke A Doubeni; Adeyinka O Laiyemo; Angela C Young; Carrie N Klabunde; George Reed; Terry S Field; Robert H Fletcher Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2010 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Ramzi G Salloum; Racquel E Kohler; Gail A Jensen; Stacey L Sheridan; William R Carpenter; Andrea K Biddle Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2013-11-06 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Douglas W Roblin; Debra P Ritzwoller; Daniel I Rees; Nikki M Carroll; Anping Chang; Matthew F Daley Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Deirdre A Shires; Kurt C Stange; George Divine; Scott Ratliff; Ronak Vashi; Ming Tai-Seale; Jennifer Elston Lafata Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Erinn M Hade; David M Murray; Michael L Pennell; Dale Rhoda; Electra D Paskett; Victoria L Champion; Benjamin F Crabtree; Allen Dietrich; Mark B Dignan; Melissa Farmer; Joshua J Fenton; Susan Flocke; Robert A Hiatt; Shawna V Hudson; Michael Mitchell; Patrick Monahan; Salma Shariff-Marco; Stacey L Slone; Kurt Stange; Susan L Stewart; Pamela A Ohman Strickland Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr Date: 2010
Authors: Joshua J Fenton; Joann G Elmore; Diana S M Buist; Robert J Reid; Daniel J Tancredi; Laura-Mae Baldwin Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2010 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Elisabeth F Beaber; Anna N A Tosteson; Jennifer S Haas; Tracy Onega; Brian L Sprague; Donald L Weaver; Anne Marie McCarthy; Chyke A Doubeni; Virginia P Quinn; Celette Sugg Skinner; Ann G Zauber; William E Barlow Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-09-24 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Louise C Walter; Karla Lindquist; Sean Nugent; Tammy Schult; Sei J Lee; Michele A Casadei; Melissa R Partin Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2009-04-07 Impact factor: 25.391