OBJECTIVE: To conduct a failure analysis of cervical cancer screening among women with invasive cervical cancer in Alberta. DESIGN: Descriptive study. Review of demographic, staging and treatment information from cancer registry records; generation of documented screening history from Alberta Health billing records and self-reported history from subjects who agreed to be interviewed; and comparison of findings in initial cytology reports with those from subsequent review by at least 2 pathologists of all cytology slides for each patient for the 5 years before diagnosis. Cases were assigned to 1 of 6 categories of identified screening failure. SETTING: Alberta. SUBJECTS: All women with diagnosis of invasive cervical cancer reported to a population-based provincial cancer registry from January 1990 to December 1991. OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic, staging and treatment information; documented and self-reported screening histories; correlation of test results in initial cytology report with those generated from slide review; category of identified screening failure. RESULTS: Of the 246 women identified with invasive cancer of the cervix, 37 (15.0%) had stage IA disease; 195 (79.3%) had squamous-cell carcinoma, and 35 (14.2%) had adenocarcinoma. According to the categories of screening failure, 74 women (30.1%) had never been screened, 38 (15.4% had not been screened within 3 years before diagnosis, 42 (17.1%) had had a false-negative cytology result, and 20 (8.1%) had been managed outside of conventional protocols. Of the 23 women (9.3%) who had been screened appropriately and had true-negative results, 19 had smears that were considered technically limited. It was not possible to classify 49 (19.9%) of the cases. Agreement between the documented and the self-reported screening histories was exact for only 39 (36.1%) of the 108 women interviewed. CONCLUSIONS: Despite widespread use of opportunistic cervical screening, many women in Alberta are still not being screened adequately. In most cases women are being screened too infrequently or not at all. Self-reported screening histories are unreliable because many women may overestimate the number of smears. An organized approach to screening, as recommended by the National Workshop in Cervical Cancer Screening, may assist in reducing the incidence of invasive cervical cancer.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a failure analysis of cervical cancer screening among women with invasive cervical cancer in Alberta. DESIGN: Descriptive study. Review of demographic, staging and treatment information from cancer registry records; generation of documented screening history from Alberta Health billing records and self-reported history from subjects who agreed to be interviewed; and comparison of findings in initial cytology reports with those from subsequent review by at least 2 pathologists of all cytology slides for each patient for the 5 years before diagnosis. Cases were assigned to 1 of 6 categories of identified screening failure. SETTING: Alberta. SUBJECTS: All women with diagnosis of invasive cervical cancer reported to a population-based provincial cancer registry from January 1990 to December 1991. OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic, staging and treatment information; documented and self-reported screening histories; correlation of test results in initial cytology report with those generated from slide review; category of identified screening failure. RESULTS: Of the 246 women identified with invasive cancer of the cervix, 37 (15.0%) had stage IA disease; 195 (79.3%) had squamous-cell carcinoma, and 35 (14.2%) had adenocarcinoma. According to the categories of screening failure, 74 women (30.1%) had never been screened, 38 (15.4% had not been screened within 3 years before diagnosis, 42 (17.1%) had had a false-negative cytology result, and 20 (8.1%) had been managed outside of conventional protocols. Of the 23 women (9.3%) who had been screened appropriately and had true-negative results, 19 had smears that were considered technically limited. It was not possible to classify 49 (19.9%) of the cases. Agreement between the documented and the self-reported screening histories was exact for only 39 (36.1%) of the 108 women interviewed. CONCLUSIONS: Despite widespread use of opportunistic cervical screening, many women in Alberta are still not being screened adequately. In most cases women are being screened too infrequently or not at all. Self-reported screening histories are unreliable because many women may overestimate the number of smears. An organized approach to screening, as recommended by the National Workshop in Cervical Cancer Screening, may assist in reducing the incidence of invasive cervical cancer.
Authors: A B Miller; G Anderson; J Brisson; J Laidlaw; N Le Pitre; P Malcolmson; P Mirwaldt; G Stuart; W Sullivan Journal: CMAJ Date: 1991-11-15 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: D T Janerich; O Hadjimichael; P E Schwartz; D M Lowell; J W Meigs; M J Merino; J T Flannery; A P Polednak Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 1995-06 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: A R Spence; A Alobaid; P Drouin; P Goggin; L Gilbert; D Provencher; P Tousignant; J A Hanley; E L Franco Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: G S Ogilvie; D M Patrick; M Schulzer; J W Sellors; M Petric; K Chambers; R White; J M FitzGerald Journal: Sex Transm Infect Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 3.519
Authors: Emmanuel N S Sackey; Manideepthi Pemmaraju; Marie R Griffin; Jessica L Castilho Journal: BMC Womens Health Date: 2022-03-12 Impact factor: 2.809