BACKGROUND: The current study was performed to determine, in rural settings, the relation between the type and status of insurance coverage and being up-to-date for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. METHODS: Four primary care practices in 2 rural Oregon communities participated. Medical chart reviews that were conducted between October 2008 and August 2009 assessed insurance coverage and up-to-date status for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. Inclusion criteria involved having at least 1 health care visit within the past 5 years and being aged ≥ 55 years. RESULTS: The majority of patients were women aged 55 years to 70 years, employed or retired, and who had private health insurance and an average of 2.5 comorbid conditions. The overall percentage of eligible women who were up-to-date for cervical cancer screening was 30%; approximately 27% of women were up-to-date for clinical breast examination, 37% were up-to-date for mammography, and 19% were up-to-date for both mammography and clinical breast examination. Approximately 38% of men and 35% of women were up-to-date for colorectal cancer screening using any test at appropriate screening intervals. In general, having any insurance versus being uninsured was associated with undergoing cancer screening. For each type of screening, patients who had at least 1 health maintenance visit were significantly more likely to be up-to-date compared with those with no health maintenance visits. A significant interaction was found between having health maintenance visits, having any health insurance, and being up-to-date for cancer screening tests. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the percentage of patients who were up-to-date for any cancer screening, especially cervical cancer screening, was found to be very low in rural Oregon. Patients with some form of health insurance were more likely to have had a health maintenance visit within the previous 2 years and to be up-to-date for breast, cervical, and/or colorectal cancer screening.
BACKGROUND: The current study was performed to determine, in rural settings, the relation between the type and status of insurance coverage and being up-to-date for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. METHODS: Four primary care practices in 2 rural Oregon communities participated. Medical chart reviews that were conducted between October 2008 and August 2009 assessed insurance coverage and up-to-date status for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. Inclusion criteria involved having at least 1 health care visit within the past 5 years and being aged ≥ 55 years. RESULTS: The majority of patients were women aged 55 years to 70 years, employed or retired, and who had private health insurance and an average of 2.5 comorbid conditions. The overall percentage of eligible women who were up-to-date for cervical cancer screening was 30%; approximately 27% of women were up-to-date for clinical breast examination, 37% were up-to-date for mammography, and 19% were up-to-date for both mammography and clinical breast examination. Approximately 38% of men and 35% of women were up-to-date for colorectal cancer screening using any test at appropriate screening intervals. In general, having any insurance versus being uninsured was associated with undergoing cancer screening. For each type of screening, patients who had at least 1 health maintenance visit were significantly more likely to be up-to-date compared with those with no health maintenance visits. A significant interaction was found between having health maintenance visits, having any health insurance, and being up-to-date for cancer screening tests. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the percentage of patients who were up-to-date for any cancer screening, especially cervical cancer screening, was found to be very low in rural Oregon. Patients with some form of health insurance were more likely to have had a health maintenance visit within the previous 2 years and to be up-to-date for breast, cervical, and/or colorectal cancer screening.
Authors: Lee S Caplan; David V McQueen; Judith R Qualters; Marilyn Leff; Carol Garrett; Ned Calonge Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Laura C Seeff; Thomas B Richards; Jean A Shapiro; Marion R Nadel; Diane L Manninen; Leslie S Given; Fred B Dong; Linda D Winges; Matthew T McKenna Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Reuben K Varghese; Carol Friedman; Faruque Ahmed; Adele L Franks; Marsha Manning; Laura C Seeff Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Garth H Rauscher; Timothy P Johnson; Young Ik Cho; Jennifer A Walk Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2008-04-01 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Carrie N Klabunde; Gerald F Riley; Margaret T Mandelson; Paul S Frame; Martin L Brown Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: S J Winawer; A G Zauber; M N Ho; M J O'Brien; L S Gottlieb; S S Sternberg; J D Waye; M Schapiro; J H Bond; J F Panish Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1993-12-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Patricia A Carney; Jean P O'Malley; Andrea Gough; David I Buckley; James Wallace; Lyle J Fagnan; Cynthia Morris; Motomi Mori; John D Heintzman; David Lieberman Journal: Prev Med Date: 2013-09-09 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Jennifer L Holub; Cynthia Morris; Lyle J Fagnan; Judith R Logan; LeAnn C Michaels; David A Lieberman Journal: J Rural Health Date: 2017-01-03 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Kenyon C Bolton; John L Mace; Pamela M Vacek; Sally D Herschorn; Ted A James; Jeffrey A Tice; Karla Kerlikowske; Berta M Geller; Donald L Weaver; Brian L Sprague Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-06-23 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: A Rundle; S Iles; K Matheson; L E Cahill; C C Forbes; N Saint-Jacques; R Urquhart; T Younis Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Susan A Sabatino; Trevor D Thompson; Jacqueline W Miller; Nancy Breen; Mary C White; Erica Breslau; Meredith L Shoemaker Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2018-09-28 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Kevin A Henry; Kaila McDonald; Recinda Sherman; Anita Y Kinney; Antoinette M Stroup Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2014-05-27 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Betty Y Liu; Jean O'Malley; Motomi Mori; Lyle J Fagnan; David Lieberman; Cynthia D Morris; David I Buckley; John D Heintzman; Patricia A Carney Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2014 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.657