Literature DB >> 28716995

Impact of GP reminders on follow-up of abnormal cervical cytology: a before-after study in Danish general practice.

Bettina Kjær Kristiansen1, Berit Andersen2, Flemming Bro3, Hans Svanholm4, Peter Vedsted5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Dysplasia may progress because of a loss to follow-up after an abnormal cervical cytology. Approximately 18% of Danish women postpone the recommended follow-up, which depends on the cytology results. AIM: To investigate if a reminder to the GP about missed follow-up could reduce the proportion of women who fail to act on a recommended follow-up, and to analyse the effect on sociodemographic and general practice variations. DESIGN AND
SETTING: A national electronic GP reminder system was launched in Denmark in 2012 to target missed follow-up after screening, opportunistic testing, or surveillance indication. The authors compared follow-up proportions in a national observational before-after study.
METHOD: From national registries, 1.5 million cervical cytologies (from 2009 to 2013) were eligible for inclusion. Approximately 10% had a recommendation for follow-up. The proportion of cervical cytologies without follow-up was calculated at different time points. Results were stratified by follow-up recommendations and sociodemographic characteristics, and changes in practice variation for follow-up were analysed.
RESULTS: Fewer women with a recommendation for follow-up missed follow-up 6 months after a GP reminder. Follow-up improved in all investigated sociodemographic groups (age, ethnicity, education, and cohabitation status). Interaction was found for age and cohabitation status. Variation between practices in loss to follow-up was significantly reduced.
CONCLUSION: An electronic GP reminder system showed potential to improve the quality of cervical cancer screening through reduced loss to follow-up. © British Journal of General Practice 2017.

Entities:  

Keywords:  early detection of cancer; general practice; mass screening; quality of health care; uterine cervical neoplasms

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28716995      PMCID: PMC5519130          DOI: 10.3399/bjgp17X691913

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  25 in total

1.  General practice and primary health care in Denmark.

Authors:  Kjeld Møller Pedersen; John Sahl Andersen; Jens Søndergaard
Journal:  J Am Board Fam Med       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 2.657

2.  Non-participation in screening: the case of cervical cancer in Denmark.

Authors:  Pierre-Antoine Dugué; Elsebeth Lynge; Beth Bjerregaard; Matejka Rebolj
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2012-01-24       Impact factor: 4.018

3.  Follow-up of abnormal or inadequate cervical smears using two guidance systems: RCT on effectiveness.

Authors:  Rosella P M G Hermens; Bert G Siebers; Marlies E J L Hulscher; Jozé C C Braspenning; Jan H M van Doremalen; Antonius Hanselaar; Richard P T M Grol; Chris van Weel
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2005-09-19       Impact factor: 4.018

Review 4.  Process of care failures in invasive cervical cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Andrea R Spence; Patricia Goggin; Eduardo L Franco
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2007-06-22       Impact factor: 4.018

5.  Socioeconomic position and stage of cervical cancer in Danish women diagnosed 2005 to 2009.

Authors:  Else Ibfelt; Susanne K Kjær; Christoffer Johansen; Claus Høgdall; Marianne Steding-Jessen; Kirsten Frederiksen; Birgitte Lidegaard Frederiksen; Merete Osler; Susanne Oksbjerg Dalton
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2012-03-20       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  The value of improving failures within a cervical cancer screening program: an example from Norway.

Authors:  Emily A Burger; Jane J Kim
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2014-03-20       Impact factor: 7.396

7.  Health literacy as a predictor of follow-up after an abnormal Pap smear: a prospective study.

Authors:  Stacy Tessler Lindau; Anirban Basu; Sara A Leitsch
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Systems strategies to support cancer screening in U.S. primary care practice.

Authors:  K Robin Yabroff; Jane Zapka; Carrie N Klabunde; Gigi Yuan; Dennis W Buckman; David Haggstrom; Steven B Clauser; Jacqueline Miller; Stephen H Taplin
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2011-10-05       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 9.  Is the promise of cancer-screening programs being compromised? Quality of follow-up care after abnormal screening results.

Authors:  K Robin Yabroff; Kathleen Shakira Washington; Amy Leader; Elizabeth Neilson; Jeanne Mandelblatt
Journal:  Med Care Res Rev       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.929

10.  Natural history of cervical neoplasia and risk of invasive cancer in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Margaret R E McCredie; Katrina J Sharples; Charlotte Paul; Judith Baranyai; Gabriele Medley; Ronald W Jones; David C G Skegg
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2008-04-11       Impact factor: 41.316

View more
  1 in total

1.  Recall Efforts Successfully Increase Follow-Up for Cervical Cancer Screening Among Women With Human Papillomavirus in Honduras.

Authors:  Kerry A Thomson; Manuel Sandoval; Carolyn Bain; Francesca Holme; Pooja Bansil; Jacqueline Figueroa; Silvia de Sanjosé
Journal:  Glob Health Sci Pract       Date:  2020-06-30
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.