Improving follow-up to abnormal breast cancer screening in an urban population: A patient navigation intervention

Cancer

Volumn 109, Issue 2 SUPPL., 2007, Pages 359-367

  Battaglia, Tracy A ^a   Roloff, Kathryn ^b   Posner, Michael A ^c   Freund, Karen M ^a  

^a BOSTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL   (United States)

^c VILLANOVA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast neoplasm; Case management; Mass screening; Medically underserved areas; Minority groups; Urban population

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AFRICAN AMERICAN; AGED; ASIAN AMERICAN; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; CONFERENCE PAPER; ETHNIC DIFFERENCE; EUROPEAN AMERICAN; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH INSURANCE; HISPANIC; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; PATIENT ADVOCACY; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT NAVIGATION; PATIENT REFERRAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RACE DIFFERENCE; URBAN POPULATION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTINUITY OF PATIENT CARE; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; ETHNIC GROUPS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; MINORITY GROUPS; PATIENT-CENTERED CARE; UNITED STATES; URBAN POPULATION;

EID: 33846261950     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.22354     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (48)

1. Ries LE, Eisner MP, Kosary CL, et al., eds. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2000. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 2003.
2. McCarthy EP, Burns RB, Coughlin SS, et al. Mammography use helps to explain differences in breast cancer stage at diagnosis between older black and white women. Ann Intern Med. 1998;128:729-736.
3. Jacobellis J, Cutter G. Mammography screening and difference in stage of disease by race/ethnicity. Am J Public Health. 2002;92:1144-1150.
4. Jones BA, Kasl SY Curnen MG, Owens PH, Dubrow R. Can mammography screening explain the racial difference in stage at diagnosis of breast cancer? Cancer. 1995;75:2103-2113.
5. Jones BA, Patterson EA, Calvocoressi L. Mammography screening in African American women: Evaluating the research. Cancer. 2003;97 (Suppl 1):258-272.
6. Bastani R, Yabroff KR, Myers RE, Glenn B. Interventions to improve follow-up of abnormal findings in cancer screening. Cancer. 2004;101 (Suppl 5):1188-1200.
7. Jones BA, Dailey A, Calvocoressi L, Reams K, Kasl SV, Lee CH, Hsu H. Inadequate follow-up of abnormal screening mammogram: Findings from the race differences in screening mammography process study. Cancer Causes Control. 2005;16:809-821.
8. Caplan LS, May DS, Richardson LC. Time to diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer: Results from the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, 1991-1995. Am J Public Health. 2000;90:130-134.
9. Chang SW, Kerlikowske K, Napoles-Springer A, Posner SF, Sickles EA, Perez-Stable EJ. Racial differences in timeliness of follow-up after abnormal screening mammography. Cancer. 1996;78:1395-1402.
10. Kerlikowske K. Timeliness of follow-up after abnormal screening mammography. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1996;40:53-64.
11. Webber PA, Fox P, Zhang X, Pond M. An examination of differential follow-up rates in breast cancer screening. J Community Health. 1996;21:123-132.
12. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Evidence report and evidence-based recommendations: Cancer prevention and treatment demonstration for ethnic and racial minorities. Bethesda, MD: United States Department of Health and Human Services; 2003.
13. Dohan D, Schrag D. Using navigators to improve care of underserved patients. Cancer. 2005;104:848-855.
14. Healthcare Association of New York State (HANYS). Breast health patient navigator resource kit; 2002. Available at www.hanys.org. Accessed August 15, 2005.
15. Capitman JA, Bhalotra S, Ruwe M. Cancer and Elders of Color: Opportunities for Reducing Health Disparities. Aldershot, Hampshire, England: Ashgate; 2005.
16. National Institutes of Health. Patient navigation research program; 2004. Available from http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-CA-05-019.html. Accessed August 2005.
17. Avon Foundation Breast Cancer Crusade. Available at www. avoncompany.com/women/avoncrusade/2005_BC_funding_ guidelines.pdf. Accessed August 28, 2005.
18. Freeman HP, Muth BJ, Kerner JF. Expanding access to cancer screening and clinical follow-up among the medically underserved. Cancer Pract. 1995;3:19-30.
19. Longest BB, Young GJ. Coordination and Communication. In: Shortell SK, Kaluzny AD, eds. Health Care Management: Organization Design and Behavior, 4th edn. Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers; 2000:237-275.
20. Richards MA, Westcombe AM, Love SB, Littlejohns P, Ramirez AJ. Influence of delay on survival in patients with breast cancer: A systematic review. Lancet. 1999;353:1119-1126.
21. SAS Institute. SAS release 8.02. Cary, NC: SAS Institute; 1999-2001.
22. Wagner AK, Soumerai SB, Zhang F, Ross-Degnan D. Segmented regression analysis of interrupted time series studies in medication use research. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2002;27:299-309.
23. Benard VB, Lee NC, Piper M, Richardson L. Race-specific results of Papanicolaou testing and the rate of cervical neoplasia in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, 1991-1998 (United States). Cancer Causes Control. 2001;12:61-68.
24. Bennetts A, Irwig L, Oldenburg B, et al. PEAPS-Q: A questionnaire to measure the psychosocial effects of having an abnormal pap smear. Psychosocial effects of abnormal Pap smears questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48:1235-1243.
25. Brett J, Austoker J. Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: Psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting reattendance. J Public Health Med. 2001;23:292-300.
26. Carey P, Gjerdingen DK. Follow-up of abnormal Papanicolaou smears among women of different races. J Fam Pract. 1993;37:583-587.
27. Crane LA. Social support and adherence behavior among women with abnormal Pap smears. J Cancer Educ. 1996;11:164-173.
28. Deane KA, Degner LF. Information needs, uncertainty, and anxiety in women who had a breast biopsy with benign outcome. Cancer Nurs. 1998;21:117-126.
29. Haas J, Kaplan C, McMillan A, Esserman LJ. Does timely assessment affect the anxiety associated with an abnormal mammogram result? J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2001;10:599-605.
30. Hunt LM, De Voogd KB, Soucy MD, Longworth IC. Exploring loss to follow-up: Abnormal Pap screening in Hispanic patients. Cancer Pract. 2002;10:122-129.
31. Lauver D, Rubin M. Women's concerns about abnormal Papanicolaou test results. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 1991;20:154-159.
32. Lauver DR, Kruse K, Baggot A. Women's uncertainties, coping, and moods regarding abnormal Papanicolaou results. J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 1999;8:1103-1112.
33. McCarthy BD, Yood MU, Janz NK, Boohaker EA, Ward RE, Johnson CC. Evaluation of factors potentially associated with inadequate follow-up of mammographic abnormalities. Cancer. 1996;77:2070-2076..
34. McKee MD, Caban A, Burton W, Mulvihill M. Women's knowledge and experience of atypical Pap results in a high risk community. Women Health. 2002;36:19-31.
35. Rojas M, Mandelblatt J, Cagney K, Kerner J, Freeman H. Barriers to follow-up of abnormal screening mammograms among low-income minority women. Cancer Control Center of Harlem. Ethn Health. 1996;1:221-228.
36. Shinn E, Basen-Engquist K, Le T, et al. Distress after an abnormal Pap smear result: Scale development and psychometric validation. Prev Med. 2004;39:404-412.
37. Zapka JG, Puleo E, Taplin SH, et al. Processes of care in cervical and breast cancer screening and follow-up the importance of communication. Prev Med. 2004;39:81-90.
38. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chiasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2001.
39. Ward MD, Rieve JA. The role of case management in disease management. In: Todd WE, Nash E, eds. Disease Management: A Systems Approach to Improving Patient Outcomes. Chicago, IL: American Hospital Publishing; 1997: 235-259.
40. Norris SL, Nichols PJ, Caspersen CJ, et al., and the Task Force on Community Preventive Services. The effectiveness of disease and case management for people with diabetes. A systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2002;22 (Suppl 4):15-38.
41. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Cancer Prevention and Treatment Demonstration for Ethnic and Racial Minorities 2005. Available at www.cms.hhs.gov/researchers/demos/CPTD/FRN12_23_04.pdf.
42. United States Senate. House Committee Report. Patient Navigator Outreach and Chronic Disease Prevention Act of 2005, 109th Congress, 1st session, 2005.
43. United States Senate.House Committee Report. Patient Navigator Outreach and Chronic Disease Prevention Act of 2003, 108th Congress, 1st session, 2003.
44. Champion V, Maraj M, Hui S, Perkins AJ, Tierney W, Menon U, Skinner CS. Comparisons of tailored interventions to increase mammography screening in nonadherent older women. Prev Med. 2003;36:150-158.
45. Olivotto IA, Borugian MJ, Kan L, et al. Improving the time to diagnosis after an abnormal screening mammogram. Can J Public Health. 2001;92:366-371.
46. Manfredi C, Lacey L, Warnecke R. Results of an intervention to improve compliance with referrals for evaluation of suspected malignancies at neighborhood public health centers. Am J Public Health. 1990;80:85-87.
47. Engelstad LP, Stewart SL, Nguyen BH, Bedeian KL, Rubin MM, Pasick RJ, Hiatt RA. Abnormal Pap smear follow-up in a high-risk population. Cancer Epi Bio Prev. 2001;10:1015-1020.
48. Ell K, Vourlekis B, Muderspach L, et al. Abnormal cervical screen follow-up among low income Latinas: Project safe. J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2002;11:639-651.