Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Jul-Aug;23(4):e205-14.
doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2013.04.002.

Pap, mammography, and clinical breast examination screening among women with disabilities: a systematic review

Elena M Andresen  1 , Jana J Peterson-Besse, Gloria L Krahn, Emily S Walsh, Willi Horner-Johnson, Lisa I Iezzoni
Affiliations

Pap, mammography, and clinical breast examination screening among women with disabilities: a systematic review

Elena M Andresen et al. Womens Health Issues. 2013 Jul-Aug.

Abstract

Background: Research has found some disparities between U.S. women with and without disabilities in receiving clinical preventive services. Substantial differences may also exist within the population of women with disabilities. The current study examined published research on Pap smears, mammography, and clinical breast examinations across disability severity levels among women with disabilities.

Methods: Informed by an expert panel, we followed guidelines for systematic literature reviews and searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Cinahl databases. We also reviewed in-depth four disability- or preventive service-relevant journals. Two reviewers independently extracted data from all selected articles.

Findings: Five of 74 reviewed publications of met all our inclusion criteria and all five reported data on Pap smears, mammography, and clinical breast examination. Articles classified disability severity groups by functional and/or activity levels. Associations between disability severity and Pap smear use were inconsistent across the publications. Mammography screening fell as disability level increased according to three of the five studies. Results demonstrated modestly lower screening, but also were inconsistent for clinical breast examinations across studies.

Conclusion: Evidence is inconsistent concerning disparities in these important cancer screening services with increasing disability levels. Published studies used differing methods and definitions, adding to concerns about the evidence for screening disparities rising along with increasing disability. More focused research is required to determine whether significant disparities exist in cancer screening among women with differing disability levels. This information is essential for national and local public health and health care organizations to target interventions to improve care for women with disabilities.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart for review.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Allen SM, Wieland S, Griffin J, Gozalo P. Continuity in provider and site of care and preventive services receipt in an adult Medicaid population with physical disabilities. Disability and Health Journal. 2009;2(4):180–187. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Altman B, Bernstein A. Disability and health in the United States, 2001–2005. DHHS publication no. (PHS) 2008–1035) National Center for Health Statistics; Hyattsville, MD: 2008.
    1. Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2005;8(1):19–32.
    1. Armour BS, Swanson M, Waldman HB, Perlman SP. A profile of state-level differences in the oral health of people with and without disabilities, in the U.S., in 2004. Public Health Reports. 2008;123(1):67–75. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barr JK, Giannotti TE, Van Hoof TJ, Mongoven J, Curry M. Understanding barriers to participation in mammography by women with disabilities. American Journal of Health Promotion. 2008;22(6):381–385. - PubMed

Publication types