Alai Tan1, Yong-Fang Kuo, James S Goodwin. 1. Department of Preventive Medicine and Community Health, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas 77555-1148, USA. altan@utmb.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most studies use age as a cutoff to evaluate screening mammography utilization, generally examining screening up to age 75 years (the age-cutoff method). However, many experts and guidelines encourage clinicians to consider patient health and/or life expectancy. PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of estimating screening mammography utilization in older women using the age-cutoff method versus using a method based on the projected life expectancy. METHODS: Two cohorts were selected from female Medicare beneficiaries aged 67-90 years living in Texas in 2001 and 2006. The 2001 cohort (n=716,279) was used to generate life-expectancy estimates by age and comorbidity, which were then applied to the 2006 cohort (n=697,825). Screening mammography utilization during 2006-2007 was measured for the 2006 cohort. Data were collected in 2000-2007 and analyzed in 2011. RESULTS: The screening rate was 52.7% in women aged 67-74 years based on age alone, compared to 53.5% in women in the same age group with a life expectancy of ≥7 years. A large proportion (63.4%) of women aged 75-90 years (n=370,583) had a life expectancy of ≥7 years. Those women had a screening rate of 42.7%. The screening rate was 35.7% in women aged 75-90 years based on age alone, compared to 16.3% in women in the same age group with a life expectancy of <5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Estimating screening mammography utilization among older women can be improved by using projected life expectancy rather than the age-cutoff method. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: Most studies use age as a cutoff to evaluate screening mammography utilization, generally examining screening up to age 75 years (the age-cutoff method). However, many experts and guidelines encourage clinicians to consider patient health and/or life expectancy. PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of estimating screening mammography utilization in older women using the age-cutoff method versus using a method based on the projected life expectancy. METHODS: Two cohorts were selected from female Medicare beneficiaries aged 67-90 years living in Texas in 2001 and 2006. The 2001 cohort (n=716,279) was used to generate life-expectancy estimates by age and comorbidity, which were then applied to the 2006 cohort (n=697,825). Screening mammography utilization during 2006-2007 was measured for the 2006 cohort. Data were collected in 2000-2007 and analyzed in 2011. RESULTS: The screening rate was 52.7% in women aged 67-74 years based on age alone, compared to 53.5% in women in the same age group with a life expectancy of ≥7 years. A large proportion (63.4%) of women aged 75-90 years (n=370,583) had a life expectancy of ≥7 years. Those women had a screening rate of 42.7%. The screening rate was 35.7% in women aged 75-90 years based on age alone, compared to 16.3% in women in the same age group with a life expectancy of <5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Estimating screening mammography utilization among older women can be improved by using projected life expectancy rather than the age-cutoff method. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Jennifer M Gierisch; Jo Anne Earp; Noel T Brewer; Barbara K Rimer Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2010-03-30 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Robert A Smith; Vilma Cokkinides; Durado Brooks; Debbie Saslow; Otis W Brawley Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2010 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Kala M Mehta; Kathy Z Fung; Christine E Kistler; Anna Chang; Louise C Walter Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2010-01-14 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Patricia A Ganz; Denise Aberle; Amy Abernethy; Justin Bekelman; Otis Brawley; James S Goodwin; Jim C Hu; Deborah Schrag; Jennifer S Temel; Lowell Schnipper Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-10-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michael S Simon; Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller; Cynthia A Thomson; Roberta M Ray; F Allan Hubbell; Lawrence Lessin; Dorothy S Lane; Lew H Kuller Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2014-09-25 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Jan M Eberth; Karl Eschbach; Jeffrey S Morris; Hoang T Nguyen; Md Monir Hossain; Linda S Elting Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2013-07-05 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Rebecca A Hubbard; Ellen S O'Meara; Louise M Henderson; Deirdre Hill; Dejana Braithwaite; Jennifer S Haas; Christoph I Lee; Brian L Sprague; Jennifer Alford-Teaster; Anna N A Tosteson; Karen J Wernli; Tracy Onega Journal: Prev Med Date: 2016-05-31 Impact factor: 4.018