Is the promise of cancer-screening programs being compromised? Quality of follow-up care after abnormal screening results
- PMID: 12971231
- DOI: 10.1177/1077558703254698
Is the promise of cancer-screening programs being compromised? Quality of follow-up care after abnormal screening results
Abstract
Cancer screening has increased dramatically in the United States, yet in some populations, particularly racial minorities or the poor, advanced disease at diagnosis remains high. One potential explanation is that follow-up of abnormal tests is suboptimal, and the benefits of screening are not being realized. The authors used a conceptual model of access to care and integrated constructs from models of provider and patient health behaviors to review published literature on follow-up care. Most studies reported that fewer than 75 percent of patients received some follow-up care, indicating that the promise of screening may be compromised. They identified pervasive barriers to follow-up at the provider, patient, and health care system levels. Interventions that address these barriers appear to be effective. Improvement of data infrastructure and reporting will be important objectives for policy makers, and further use of conceptual models by researchers may improve intervention development and, ultimately, cancer control.
Similar articles
-
Interventions to improve follow-up of abnormal findings in cancer screening.Cancer. 2004 Sep 1;101(5 Suppl):1188-200. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20506. Cancer. 2004. PMID: 15316914 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Having a personal healthcare provider and receipt of adequate cervical and breast cancer screening.J Am Board Fam Med. 2010 Jan-Feb;23(1):75-81. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2010.01.090034. J Am Board Fam Med. 2010. PMID: 20051545
-
Implementing recommendations for the early detection of breast and cervical cancer among low-income women.MMWR Recomm Rep. 2000 Mar 31;49(RR-2):37-55. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2000. PMID: 15580731
-
A framework for improving the quality of cancer care: the case of breast and cervical cancer screening.Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003 Jan;12(1):4-13. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003. PMID: 12540497 Review.
-
Are patterns of health behavior associated with cancer screening?Am J Health Promot. 2009 Jan-Feb;23(3):168-75. doi: 10.4278/ajhp.07082085. Am J Health Promot. 2009. PMID: 19149421
Cited by
-
Postreferral colonoscopy delays in diagnosis of colorectal cancer: a mixed-methods analysis.Qual Manag Health Care. 2012 Oct-Dec;21(4):252-61. doi: 10.1097/QMH.0b013e31826d1f28. Qual Manag Health Care. 2012. PMID: 23011072 Free PMC article.
-
Using Natural Language Processing to Extract Abnormal Results From Cancer Screening Reports.J Patient Saf. 2017 Sep;13(3):138-143. doi: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000127. J Patient Saf. 2017. PMID: 25025472 Free PMC article.
-
Promoting colorectal cancer screening among Haitian Americans.J Ga Public Health Assoc. 2015;5(2):149-152. J Ga Public Health Assoc. 2015. PMID: 26819972 Free PMC article.
-
Impact of GP reminders on follow-up of abnormal cervical cytology: a before-after study in Danish general practice.Br J Gen Pract. 2017 Aug;67(661):e580-e587. doi: 10.3399/bjgp17X691913. Epub 2017 Jul 17. Br J Gen Pract. 2017. PMID: 28716995 Free PMC article.
-
Chatbot-interfaced and cognitive-affective barrier-driven messages to improve colposcopy adherence after abnormal Pap test results in underserved urban women: A feasibility pilot study.Transl Behav Med. 2024 Jan 11;14(1):1-12. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibad064. Transl Behav Med. 2024. PMID: 38014626 Free PMC article.