Literature DB >> 33402140

Temporal trends and regional disparities in cancer screening utilization: an observational Swiss claims-based study.

Caroline Bähler1,2, Beat Brüngger3,4, Agne Ulyte4, Matthias Schwenkglenks4, Viktor von Wyl4, Holger Dressel5, Oliver Gruebner4,6, Wenjia Wei4, Eva Blozik3,7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We examined colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer screening utilization in eligible populations within three data cross-sections, and identified factors potentially modifying cancer screening utilization in Swiss adults.
METHODS: The study is based on health insurance claims data of the Helsana Group. The Helsana Group is one of the largest health insurers in Switzerland, insuring approximately 15% of the entire Swiss population across all regions and age groups. We assessed proportions of the eligible populations receiving colonoscopy/fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), mammography, or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in the years 2014, 2016, and 2018, and calculated average marginal effects of individual, temporal, regional, insurance-, supply-, and system-related variables on testing utilization using logistic regression.
RESULTS: Overall, 8.3% of the eligible population received colonoscopy/FOBT in 2014, 8.9% in 2016, and 9.2% in 2018. In these years, 20.9, 21.2, and 20.4% of the eligible female population received mammography, and 30.5, 31.1, and 31.8% of the eligible male population had PSA testing. Adjusted testing utilization varied little between 2014 and 2018; there was an increasing trend of 0.8% (0.6-1.0%) for colonoscopy/FOBT and of 0.5% (0.2-0.8%) for PSA testing, while mammography use decreased by 1.5% (1.2-1.7%). Generally, testing utilization was higher in French-speaking and Italian-speaking compared to German-speaking region for all screening types. Cantonal programs for breast cancer screening were associated with an increase of 7.1% in mammography utilization. In contrast, a high density of relevant specialist physicians showed null or even negative associations with screening utilization.
CONCLUSIONS: Variation in cancer screening utilization was modest over time, but considerable between regions. Regional variation was highest for mammography use where recommendations are debated most controversially, and the implementation of programs differed the most.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer screening; Colonoscopy; Mammography; Prostate-specific antigen testing; Temporal analysis

Year:  2021        PMID: 33402140      PMCID: PMC7786957          DOI: 10.1186/s12889-020-10079-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Public Health        ISSN: 1471-2458            Impact factor:   3.295


  51 in total

1.  Are temporal trends in colonoscopy among young adults concordant with colorectal cancer incidence?

Authors:  Stacey A Fedewa; Rebecca L Siegel; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2019-07-11       Impact factor: 2.136

2.  Clinical Practice Guidelines: What's Next?

Authors:  Paul G Shekelle
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2018-08-28       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Differences in breast cancer screening rates: an issue of ethnicity or socioeconomics?

Authors:  M Qureshi; H L Thacker; D G Litaker; C Kippes
Journal:  J Womens Health Gend Based Med       Date:  2000-11

4.  Variation in colorectal cancer testing between primary care physicians: a cross-sectional study in Switzerland.

Authors:  Alexander Leonhard Braun; Emanuele Prati; Yonas Martin; Charles Dvořák; Kali Tal; Nikola Biller-Andorno; Jean-Luc Bulliard; Jacques Cornuz; Kevin Selby; Reto Auer
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2019-06-15       Impact factor: 3.380

5.  Registry-based study of trends in breast cancer screening mammography before and after the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations.

Authors:  Brian L Sprague; Kenyon C Bolton; John L Mace; Sally D Herschorn; Ted A James; Pamela M Vacek; Donald L Weaver; Berta M Geller
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-10-28       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Prevalence of colorectal cancer screening among adults--Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, United States, 2010.

Authors:  Djenaba A Joseph; Jessica B King; Jacqueline W Miller; Lisa C Richardson
Journal:  MMWR Suppl       Date:  2012-06-15

7.  Does provision of an evidence-based information change public willingness to accept screening tests?

Authors:  Gianfranco Domenighetti; Roberto Grilli; Jenny Rose Maggi
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing is prevalent and increasing in Stockholm County, Sweden, Despite no recommendations for PSA screening: results from a population-based study, 2003-2011.

Authors:  Tobias Nordström; Markus Aly; Mark S Clements; Caroline E Weibull; Jan Adolfsson; Henrik Grönberg
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2012-10-12       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  Previous cancer screening behavior as predictor of endoscopic colon cancer screening among women aged 50 and over, in NYC 2002.

Authors:  Rafael Guerrero-Preston; Christina Chan; David Vlahov; Maria K Mitchell; Stephen B Johnson; Harold Freeman
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2008-02

10.  Early detection of prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen testing: an empirical evaluation among general practitioners and urologists.

Authors:  Sanny Kappen; Verena Jürgens; Michael H Freitag; Alexander Winter
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2019-04-16       Impact factor: 3.989

View more
  1 in total

1.  Ten-year changes in colorectal cancer screening in Switzerland: The Swiss Health Interview Survey 2007, 2012 and 2017.

Authors:  Rémi Schneider; Lamprini Syrogiannouli; Sarah Bissig; Tamara Scharf; Jean-Luc Bulliard; Cyril Ducros; Cinzia Del Giovane; Kali Tal; Marcel Zwahlen; Kevin Selby; Reto Auer
Journal:  Prev Med Rep       Date:  2022-05-06
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.