Literature DB >> 20195174

Geographic access and the use of screening mammography.

Elena B Elkin1, Nicole M Ishill, Jacqueline G Snow, Katherine S Panageas, Peter B Bach, Laura Liberman, Fahui Wang, Deborah Schrag.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Screening mammography rates vary geographically and have recently declined. Inadequate mammography resources in some areas may impair access to this technology. We assessed the relationship between availability of mammography machines and the use of screening.
METHODS: The location and number of all mammography machines in the United States were identified from US Food and Drug Administration records of certified facilities. Inadequate capacity was defined as <1.2 mammography machines per 10,000 women age 40 or older, the threshold required to meet the Healthy People 2010 target screening rate. The impact of capacity on utilization was evaluated in 2 cohorts: female respondents age 40 or older to the 2006 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey (BRFSS) and a 5% nationwide sample of female Medicare beneficiaries age 65 or older in 2004-2005.
RESULTS: About 9% of women in the BRFSS cohort and 13% of women in the Medicare cohort lived in counties with <1.2 mammography machines per 10,000 women age 40 or older. In both cohorts, residence in a county with inadequate mammography capacity was associated with lower odds of a recent mammogram (adjusted odds ratio in BRFSS: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.80-0.98, P < 0.05; adjusted odds ratio in Medicare: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.85-0.87, P < 0.05), controlling for demographic and health care characteristics.
CONCLUSION: In counties with few or no mammography machines, limited availability of imaging resources may be a barrier to screening. Efforts to increase the number of machines in low-capacity areas may improve mammography rates and reduce geographic disparities in breast cancer screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20195174      PMCID: PMC3647348          DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181ca3ecb

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  41 in total

1.  HMO penetration and quality of care: the case of breast cancer.

Authors:  S L Decker; K Hempstead
Journal:  J Health Care Finance       Date:  1999

2.  Effectiveness of interventions designed to increase mammography use: a meta-analysis of provider-targeted strategies.

Authors:  J S Mandelblatt; K R Yabroff
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.254

3.  The effects of geography and spatial behavior on health care utilization among the residents of a rural region.

Authors:  Thomas A Arcury; Wilbert M Gesler; John S Preisser; Jill Sherman; John Spencer; Jamie Perin
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  The impact of the Mammography Quality Standards Act on the availability of mammography facilities.

Authors:  R Fischer; F Houn; A Van De Griek; S A Tucker; D Meyers; M Murphy; G Unis
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  1998 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 4.018

5.  Efficacy of screening mammography among women aged 40 to 49 years and 50 to 69 years: comparison of relative and absolute benefit.

Authors:  K Kerlikowske
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  1997

6.  A prospective study of perceived susceptibility to breast cancer and nonadherence to mammography screening guidelines in African American and White women ages 40 to 79 years.

Authors:  Lisa Calvocoressi; Stanislav V Kasl; Carol H Lee; Marilyn Stolar; Elizabeth B Claus; Beth A Jones
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.254

7.  Factors associated with women's adherence to mammography screening guidelines.

Authors:  K A Phillips; K Kerlikowske; L C Baker; S W Chang; M L Brown
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 3.402

8.  Interventions targeted toward patients to increase mammography use.

Authors:  K R Yabroff; J S Mandelblatt
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Medicare coverage, supplemental insurance, and the use of mammography by older women.

Authors:  J Blustein
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1995-04-27       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Report of the International Workshop on Screening for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  S W Fletcher; W Black; R Harris; B K Rimer; S Shapiro
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1993-10-20       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  44 in total

1.  [Negative influence of undertreatment in elderly patients with breast cancer].

Authors:  F A Giordano; F Wenz
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 3.621

2.  Characteristics of US counties with no mammography capacity.

Authors:  Lucy A Peipins; Jacqueline Miller; Thomas B Richards; Janet Kay Bobo; Ta Liu; Mary C White; Djenaba Joseph; Florence Tangka; Donatus U Ekwueme
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2012-12

Review 3.  Geographic Access to Mammography and Its Relationship to Breast Cancer Screening and Stage at Diagnosis: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Jenna A Khan-Gates; Jennifer L Ersek; Jan M Eberth; Swann A Adams; Sandi L Pruitt
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2015-07-26

4.  Effect of treatment and mammography detection on breast cancer survival over time: 1990-2007.

Authors:  Henry G Kaplan; Judith A Malmgren; Mary K Atwood; Gregory S Calip
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Time and distance barriers to mammography facilities in the Atlanta metropolitan area.

Authors:  Lucy A Peipins; Shannon Graham; Randall Young; Brian Lewis; Stephanie Foster; Barry Flanagan; Andrew Dent
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2011-08

6.  Closing the Gap: Disparities in Breast Cancer Mortality among African American Women.

Authors:  Randy C Miles
Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer       Date:  2020-09-25

7.  Effect of Population Socioeconomic and Health System Factors on Medical Care of Childhood Cancer Survivors: A Report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.

Authors:  Deirdre A Caplin; Ken R Smith; Kirsten K Ness; Heidi A Hanson; Stephanie M Smith; Paul C Nathan; Melissa M Hudson; Wendy M Leisenring; Leslie L Robison; Kevin C Oeffinger
Journal:  J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol       Date:  2016-10-18       Impact factor: 2.223

8.  Constructing Geographic Areas for Cancer Data Analysis: A Case Study on Late-stage Breast Cancer Risk in Illinois.

Authors:  Fahui Wang; Diansheng Guo; Sara McLafferty
Journal:  Appl Geogr       Date:  2012-06-15

Review 9.  Disadvantaged neighborhoods and racial disparity in breast cancer outcomes: the biological link.

Authors:  Geetanjali Saini; Angela Ogden; Lauren E McCullough; Mylin Torres; Padmashree Rida; Ritu Aneja
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2019-05-20       Impact factor: 2.506

10.  Effects of program scale-up on time to resolution for patients with abnormal screening mammography results.

Authors:  Simon Craddock Lee; Robin T Higashi; Joanne M Sanders; Hong Zhu; Stephen J Inrig; Caroline Mejias; Keith E Argenbright; Jasmin A Tiro
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2018-08-23       Impact factor: 2.506

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.