BACKGROUND & AIMS: Women with IBD have a high incidence of abnormal cervical cytology. However, little is known about how frequently women with IBD are tested for cervical abnormalities. We aimed to determine cervical testing rates among women with IBD, specifically those on immunosuppressant medications, and to identify risk factors associated with low incidence of screening. METHODS: With the PharMetrics Patient-Centric Database from 1996-2005, we identified cases of IBD and matched controls via a validated algorithm. With logistic regression, we compared utilization of cervical testing with IBD case status, patients' age, use of immunosuppressive medications, Medicaid insurance status, and use of primary care services. RESULTS: Only 70.4% of women with IBD (n = 9356) and 65.2% of matched controls (n = 25,849) received cervical testing (at least once every 3 years). Women with IBD who used primary care services had increased odds of cervical testing (odds ratio [OR], 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-1.59). Factors associated with reduced testing included Medicaid insurance (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.19-0.41), immunosuppressant medication use (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.74-0.88), and increased age (P for trend < .01). Among women on immunosuppressive medications (n = 7415), 50.1% were tested during a 15-month period. Women on immunosuppressive medications who used primary care services have improved odds of cervical testing (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.14-1.45), whereas those with Medicaid insurance had reduced odds (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.39-0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Women with IBD are tested for cervical abnormalities at suboptimal rates. Quality improvement initiatives are needed to improve disease prevention services for women with IBD.
BACKGROUND & AIMS:Women with IBD have a high incidence of abnormal cervical cytology. However, little is known about how frequently women with IBD are tested for cervical abnormalities. We aimed to determine cervical testing rates among women with IBD, specifically those on immunosuppressant medications, and to identify risk factors associated with low incidence of screening. METHODS: With the PharMetrics Patient-Centric Database from 1996-2005, we identified cases of IBD and matched controls via a validated algorithm. With logistic regression, we compared utilization of cervical testing with IBD case status, patients' age, use of immunosuppressive medications, Medicaid insurance status, and use of primary care services. RESULTS: Only 70.4% of women with IBD (n = 9356) and 65.2% of matched controls (n = 25,849) received cervical testing (at least once every 3 years). Women with IBD who used primary care services had increased odds of cervical testing (odds ratio [OR], 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-1.59). Factors associated with reduced testing included Medicaid insurance (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.19-0.41), immunosuppressant medication use (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.74-0.88), and increased age (P for trend < .01). Among women on immunosuppressive medications (n = 7415), 50.1% were tested during a 15-month period. Women on immunosuppressive medications who used primary care services have improved odds of cervical testing (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.14-1.45), whereas those with Medicaid insurance had reduced odds (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.39-0.74). CONCLUSIONS:Women with IBD are tested for cervical abnormalities at suboptimal rates. Quality improvement initiatives are needed to improve disease prevention services for women with IBD.
Authors: Lisa J Herrinton; Liyan Liu; Jennifer Elston Lafata; James E Allison; Susan E Andrade; Eli J Korner; K Arnold Chan; Richard Platt; Deborah Hiatt; Siobhán O'Connor Journal: Inflamm Bowel Dis Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 5.325
Authors: Hilal Maradit Kremers; Michelle Bidaut-Russell; Christopher G Scott; Megan S Reinalda; Alan R Zinsmeister; Sherine E Gabriel Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Lisbeth Selby; Sunanda Kane; John Wilson; Purnima Balla; Brian Riff; Christopher Bingcang; Andrew Hoellein; Smita Pande; Willem J S de Villiers Journal: Inflamm Bowel Dis Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 5.325
Authors: Seth D Crockett; Carol Q Porter; Christopher F Martin; Robert S Sandler; Michael D Kappelman Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2010-03-30 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Lea I Kredel; Oliver Schneidereit; Jörg C Hoffmann; Britta Siegmund; Jan C Preiß Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2018-12-07 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Millie D Long; Hans H Herfarth; Clare A Pipkin; Carol Q Porter; Robert S Sandler; Michael D Kappelman Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2010-01-16 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Millie D Long; Francis A Farraye; Philip N Okafor; Christopher Martin; Robert S Sandler; Michael D Kappelman Journal: Inflamm Bowel Dis Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 5.325
Authors: Christine N Manser; Michel H Maillard; Gerhard Rogler; Philipp Schreiner; Florian Rieder; Silja Bühler Journal: Digestion Date: 2020-01-22 Impact factor: 3.216