Effectiveness and efficiency of opportunistic cervical cancer screening comparison with organized screening

Medical Care

Volumn 42, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 600-609

  Adab, Peymané ^a   McGhee, Sarah M ^b,c   Yanova, Jana ^b   Wong, Chit Ming ^b   Hedley, Anthony J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^c UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Cervical screening; Effectiveness; Efficiency

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HONG KONG; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; INTERVIEW; MASS SCREENING; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TIME; UTERINE CERVIX TUMOR; UTILIZATION REVIEW; VAGINA SMEAR;

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, ROUTINE; EFFICIENCY, ORGANIZATIONAL; FEMALE; HONG KONG; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; INTERVIEWS; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PROGRAM EVALUATION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TIME; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 2942657624     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000128007.04494.29     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Parkin DM, Laara E, Muir CS. Estimates of the worldwide frequency of sixteen major cancers in 1980. Int J Cancer. 1988;41:184-197.
2. Austoker J. Cancer prevention in primary care. Screening for cervical cancer. BMJ. 1994;309:241-248.
3. Duguid HL, Duncan ID, Currie J. Screening for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in Dundee and Angus 1962-81 and its relation with invasive cervical cancer. Lancet. 1985;2:1053-1056.
4. Hakama M. Trends in the incidence of cervical cancer in the Nordic countries. In: Knut M, ed. Trends in Cancer Incidence. New York: Hemisphere Publishing Corp; 1982:279-292.
5. Johanneson G, Geirsson G, Day N. The effect of mass screening in Iceland, 1965-1974, on the incidence and mortality of cervical carcinoma. Int J Cancer. 1978;21:418-425.
6. Clarke EA, Anderson TW. Does screening by 'Pap' smears help prevent cervical cancer? A case-control study. Lancet. 1979;2:1-4.
7. Olesen F. A case-control study of cervical cytology before diagnosis of cervical cancer in Denmark. Int J Epidemiol. 1988;17:501-508.
8. Laara E, Day NE, Hakama M. Trends in mortality from cervical cancer in the Nordic countries: association with organised screening programmes. Lancet. 1987;1:1247-1249.
9. Sigurdsson K. The Icelandic and Nordic cervical screening programs: trends in incidence and mortality rates and mortality rates through 1995. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1999;78:478-485.
10. IARC Working Group on Evaluation of Cervical Cancer Screening Programmes. Screening for squamous cervical cancer: duration of low risk after negative results of cervical cytology and its implication for screening policies. BMJ. 1986;293:659-664.
11. Eddy DM. The frequency of cervical cancer screening, comparison of a mathematical model with empirical data. Cancer. 1987;60:1117-1122.
12. National Cancer Control Programmes; Policies and Managerial Guidelines. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 1995.
13. Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, et al. Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:810-819.
14. Ponten J, Adami HO, Bergstrom R, et al. Strategies for global control of cervical cancer. Int J Cancer. 1995;60:1-26.
15. Linos A, Riza E. Comparisons of cervical cancer screening programmes in the European Union. Eur J Cancer. 2000;36:2260-2265.
16. van Ballegooijen M, van den Akker-van Marle E, Patnick J, et al. Overview of important cervical cancer screening process values in European Union (EU) countries, and tentative predictions of the corresponding effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Eur J Cancer. 2000;36: 2177-2188.
17. Miller AB. The (in)efficiency of cervical screening in Europe. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38:321-326.
18. US Preventive Task Force: Cervical Cancer Screening. Available at: http://www.ahcpr.gov/clinic/uspstf/uspscerv.htm. Accessed September 10, 2003.
19. The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program; Cancer prevention and control (CDC web site). Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/ nbccedp/ CDC. Accessed September 18, 2003.
20. Resha K. NBCCEDP: Improves access to lifesaving cancer screening services. Hematology Oncology News and Issues. 2002; 1:27-29.
21. Fahs MC, Mandelblatt J, Schechter C, et al. Cost effectiveness of cervical cancer screening for the elderly. Ann Intern Med. 1992;117: 520-527.
22. Swan J, Breen N, Coates RJ, et al. Progress in cancer screening practices in the United States: results from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey. Cancer. 2003;97:1528-1540.
23. Arblaster L, Lambert M, Entwistle V, et al. A systematic review of the effectiveness of health service interventions aimed at reducing inequalities in health. J Health Serv Res Policy. 1996;1:93-103.
24. Borras JM, Guillen M, Sanchez V, et al. Educational level, voluntary private health insurance and opportunistic cancer screening among women in Catalonia. Eur J Cancer. 1999;8:427-434.
25. Ronco G, Segnan N, Ponti A. Who has Pap tests? Variables associated with the use of Pap tests in absence of screening programmes. Int J Epidemiol. 1991;20:349-353.
26. Cohen MM, Hammarstrand KM. Papanicolaou test coverage without a cytology registry. Am J Epidemiol. 1989;129:388-394.
27. Raffle AE, Alden B, Quinn M, et al. Outcomes of screening to prevent cancer: analysis of cumulative incidence of cervical abnormality and modelling of cases and deaths prevented. BMJ. 2003;326:901.
28. Anttila A, Pukkala E, Soderman B, et al. Effect of organised screening on cervical cancer incidence and mortality in Finland, 1963-1995: recent increase in cervical cancer incidence. Int J Cancer. 1999;83:59-65.
29. Nygard JF, Skare GB, Thoresen S. The cervical cancer screening programme in Norway, 1992-2000: changes in Pap smear coverage and incidence of cervical cancer. J Med Screen. 2002;9:86-91.
30. Quinn M, Babb P, Jones J, et al. Effect of screening on incidence of and mortality from cancer of cervix in England: evaluation based on routinely collected statistics. BMJ. 1999;318:904-908.
31. Nieminen P, Kallio M, Anttila A, et al. Organised vs. spontaneous Pap-smear screening for cervical cancer: a case-control study. Int J Cancer. 1999;83:55-58.
32. Goldie SJ, Kuhn L, Denny L, et al. Policy analysis of cervical cancer screening strategies in low-resource settings: clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness. JAMA. 2001;285:3107.
33. Myers ER, McCrory DC, Nanda K, et al. Mathematical model for the natural history of human papillomavirus infection and cervical carcinogenesis. Am J Epidemiol. 2000;151:1158-1171.
34. Goldie SJ. Health economics and cervical cancer prevention: a global perspective. Virus Res. 2002;89:301-309.
35. Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Gaffikin L, et al. Costs and benefits of different strategies to screen for cervical cancer in less-developed countries. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:1469.
36. Brown AD, Garber AM. Cost-effectiveness of 3 methods to enhance the sensitivity of Papanicolaou testing. JAMA. 1999;281:347.
37. van den Akker-van Marie, van Ballegooijen M, van Oortmarssen GJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening: comparison of screening policies. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:193.
38. Azocar J, Abad SM, Acosta H, et al. Prevalence of cervical dysplasia and HPV infection according to sexual behavior. Int J Cancer. 1990; 45:622-625.
39. Hanselaar AG. Criteria for organized cervical screening programs. Special emphasis on The Netherlands program. Acta Cytol. 2002;46: 619-629.
40. Miller AB. Quality assurance in screening strategies. Virus Res. 2002; 89:295-299.
41. Newell S, Girgis A, Sanson-Fisher R, et al. Accuracy of patients' recall of Pap and cholesterol screening. Am J Public Health. 2000;90:1431-1435.
42. Bowman JA, Sanson-Fisher R, Redman S. The accuracy of self-reported Pap smear. Soc Sci Med. 1997;44:969-976.
43. Bos AB, van Ballegooijen M, van Gessel-Dabekaussen AA, et al. Organised cervical cancer screening still leads to higher coverage than spontaneous screening in The Netherlands. Eur J Cancer. 1998;34: 1598-1601.
44. Department of Health. Cervical screening programme, England 1999-2000. 2000. London: Department of Health, available from Department of Health, PO Box 777, London, SEI 6XH.
45. Arbyn M, Quataert P, Van Hal G, et al. Cervical cancer screening in the Flemish region (Belgium): measurement of the attendance rate by telephone interview. Eur J Cancer Prev. 1997;6:398.
46. Ronco G, Segnan N, Giordano L, et al. Interaction of spontaneous and organised screening for cervical cancer in Turin, Italy. Eur J Cancer. 1997;33:1262-1267.
47. Orbell S, Crombie I, Robertson A, et al. Assessing the effectiveness of a screening campaign: who is missed by 80% cervical screening coverage? J R Soc Med. 1995;88:389-394.
48. Fahs MC, Plichta SB, Mandelblatt JS. Cost-effective policies for cervical cancer screening. An international review. Pharmacoeconomics. 1996;9:211-230.
49. Parazzini F, Negri E, La Vecchia C, et al. Screening practices and invasive cervical cancer risk in different age strata. Gynecol Oncol. 1990;38:76-80.
50. van Ballegooijen M, Habbema JD, van Oortmarssen GJ, et al. Preventive Pap-smears: balancing costs, risks and benefits. Br J Cancer. 1992;65: 930-933.