Interventions to improve follow-up of abnormal findings in cancer screening

Cancer

Volumn 101, Issue 5 SUPPL., 2004, Pages 1188-1200

  Bastani, Roshan ^a,d   Yabroff, K Robin ^b   Myers, Ronald E ^c   Glenn, Beth ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Abnormal findings; Cancer screening; Evaluation; Interventions; Methodologic issues

Indexed keywords

BREAST CANCER; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COLORECTAL CANCER; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; STANDARD; UNITED STATES; VALIDATION PROCESS;

EID: 4143099319     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.20506     Document Type: Review

References (92)

1. Yabroff KR, Washington KS, Leader A, Neilson E, Mandelblatt J. Is the promise of cancer-screening programs being compromised? Quality of follow-up care after abnormal screening results. Med Care Res Rev. 2003;60:294-331.
2. Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM, Polk S, Arena PJ, Fletcher SW. Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. N Engl J Med. 1998;338: 1089-1096.
3. Christiansen CL, Wang F, Barton MB, et al. Predicting the cumulative risk of false-positive mammograms. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:1657-1666.
4. Glasgow RE, Marcus AC, Bull SS, Wilson KM. Disseminating effective cancer screening interventions. Cancer. 2004;101(5 Suppl):1239-1280.
5. Lerman C, Hanjani P, Caputo C, et al. Telephone counseling improves adherence to colposcopy among lower-income minority women. J Clin Oncol. 1992;10:330-333.
6. Paskett ED, White E, Carter WB, Chu J. Improving follow-up after an abnormal Pap smear: a randomized controlled trial. Prev Med. 1990;19:630-641.
7. McKee MD, Lurio J, Marantz P, Burton W, Mulvihill M. Barriers to follow-up of abnormal Papanicolaou smears in an urban community health center. Arch Fam Med. 1999;8: 129-134.
8. Kerner JF, Yedidia M, Padgett D, et al. Realizing the promise of breast cancer screening: clinical follow-up after abnormal screening among black women. Prev Med. 2003;37:92-101.
9. Funke BL, Nicholson ME. Factors affecting patient compliance among women with abnormal Pap smears. Patient Educ Couns. 1993;20:5-15.
10. Mandelblatt J, Traxler M, Lakin P, Kanetsky P, Kao R. Targeting breast and cervical cancer screening to elderly poor black women: who will participate? The Harlem Study Team. Prev Med. 1993;22:20-33.
11. Crane LA. Social support and adherence behavior among women with abnormal Pap smears. J Cancer Educ. 1996;11: 164-173.
12. Kaplan CP, Bastani R, Marcus A, Breslow L, Nasseri K, Chen L. Low-income women with cervical abnormalities: individual and system factors affecting follow-up. J Womens Health. 1995;4:179-188.
13. McCarthy BD, Yood MU, Boohaker EA, Ward RE, Rebner M, Johnson CC. Inadequate follow-up of abnormal mammograms. Am J Prev Med. 1996;12:282-288.
14. Michielutte R, Diseker RA, Young LD, May WJ. Noncompliance in screening follow-up among family planning clinic patients with cervical dysplasia. Prev Med. 1985;14:248-258.
15. Cejtin HE, Komaroff E, Massad LS, et al. Adherence to colposcopy among women with HIV infection. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 1999;22:247-252.
16. Melnikow J, Chan BK, Stewart GK. Do follow-up recommendations for abnormal Papanicolaou smears influence patient adherence? Arch Fam Med. 1999;8:510-514.
17. Myers RE, Balshem AM, Wolf TA, Ross EA, Millner L. Screening for colorectal neoplasia: physicians' adherence to complete diagnostic evaluation. Am J Public Health. 1993;83: 1620-1622.
18. Myers RE, Hyslop T, Gerrity M, et al. Physician intention to recommend complete diagnostic evaluation in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1999; 8:587-593.
19. Boohaker EA, Ward RE, Uman JE, McCarthy BD. Patient notification and follow-up of abnormal test results. A physician survey. Arch Intern Med. 1996;156:327-331.
20. Klabunde CN, Riley GS, Mandelson MT, Frame PS, Brown ML. Health plan policies and programs for colorectal cancer screening: a national profile. Am J Manag Care. 2004;10:273-279.
21. Gusmano MK, Fairbrother G, Park H. Exploring the limits of the safety net: community health centers and care for the uninsured. Health Aff (Millwood). 2002;21:188-194.
22. 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.
23. Marcus AC, Kaplan CP, Crane LA, et al. Reducing loss-to-follow-up among women with abnormal Pap smears. Results from a randomized trial testing an intensive follow-up protocol and economic incentives. Med Care. 1998;36:397-410.
24. Marcus AC, Crane LA, Kaplan CP, et al. Improving adherence to screening follow-up among women with abnormal Pap smears: results from a large clinic-based trial of three intervention strategies. Med Care. 1992;30:216-230.
25. Miller SM, Siejak KK, Schroeder CM, Lerman C, Hernandez E, Helm CW. Enhancing adherence following abnormal Pap smears among low-income minority women: a preventive telephone counseling strategy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1997;89: 703-708.
26. Lauver D, Rubin M. Message framing, dispositional optimism, and follow-up for abnormal Papanicolaou tests. Res Nurs Health. 1990;13:199-207.
27. Paskett ED, Phillips KC, Miller ME. Improving compliance among women with abnormal Papanicolaou smears. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;86:353-359.
28. Kaplan CP, Bastani R, Belin TR, Marcus A, Nasseri K, Hu MY. Improving follow-up after an abnormal Pap smear: results from a quasi-experimental intervention study. J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2000;9:779-790.
29. Ell K, Padgett D, Vourlekis B, et al. Abnormal mammogram follow-up: a pilot study in women with low income. Cancer Pract. 2002;10:130-138.
30. Engelstad LP, Stewart SL, Nguyen BH, et al. Abnormal Pap smear follow-up in a high-risk population. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2001;10:1015-1020.
31. Holschneider CH, Felix JC, Satmary W, Johnson MT, Sandweiss LM, Montz FJ. A single-visit cervical carcinoma prevention program offered at an inner city church: a pilot project. Cancer. 1999;86:2659-2667.
32. Frisch LE. Effectiveness of a case management protocol in improving follow-up and referral of Papanicolaou smears indicating cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Am Coll Health. 1986;35:112-115.
33. Block B, Branham RA. Efforts to improve the follow-up of patients with abnormal Papanicolaou test results. J Am Board Fam Pract. 1998;11:1-11.
34. Gifford MS, Stone IK. Quality, access, and clinical issues in a nurse practitioner colposcopy outreach program. Nurse Pract. 1993;18:25-26.
35. Lacey L, Whitfield J, DeWhite W, et al. Referral adherence in an inner city breast and cervical cancer screening program. Cancer. 1993;72:950-955.
36. Michielutte R, Dignan M, Bahnson J, Wells HB. The Forsyth County Cervical Cancer Prevention Project - 11. Compliance with screening follow-up of abnormal cervical smears. Health Educ Res. 1994;9:421-432.
37. Prislin MD, Dinh T, Giglio M. On-site colposcopy services in a family practice residency clinic: impact on physician test-ordering behavior, patient compliance, and practice revenue generation. J Am Board Fam Pract. 1997;10:259-264.
38. Curtis P, Varenholt JJ, Skinner B, Addison L, Resnick J, Kebede M. Development of a Pap smear quality-assurance system in family practice. Fam Med. 1993;25:135-139.
39. Monticciolo DL, Sickles EA. Computerized follow-up of abnormalities detected at mammography screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1990;155:751-753.
40. Myers RE, Fishbein G, Hyslop T, et al. Measuring complete diagnostic evaluation in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Detect Prev. 2001;25:174-182.
41. Myers RE, Turner B, Weinberg DS, et al. Impact of a physician-oriented intervention on follow-up in colorectal cancer screening. Prev Med. 2004;38:375-381.
42. Stern MA, Fendrick AM, McDonnell WM, Gunaratnam N, Moseley R, Chey WD. A randomized, controlled trial to assess a novel colorectal cancer screening strategy: the conversion strategy-a comparison of sequential sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy with immediate conversion from sigmoidoscopy to colonoscopy in patients with an abnormal screening sigmoidoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;95:2074-2079.
43. 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.
44. Eilers GM, Swanson TK. Using reminder systems to improve Papanicolaou test follow-up. An example of continuous quality improvement. Arch Fam Med. 1993;2:1136-1140.
45. Vernon SW, Briss PA, Tiro J, Warnecke RB. Some methodological lessons learned from cancer screening research. Cancer. 2004;101(5 Suppl):1131-1145.
46. Aro AR, Pilvikki AS, van Elderen TM, van der PE, van der Kamp LJ. False-positive findings in mammography screening induces short-term distress-breast cancer-specific concern prevails longer. Eur J Cancer. 2000;36:1089-1097.
47. Bell S, Porter M, Kitchener H, Fraser C, Fisher P, Mann E. Psychological response to cervical screening. Prev Med. 1995;24:610-616.
48. Lerman CE, Rimer BK. Psychosocial impact of cancer screening. Oncology (Huntingt). 1993;7:67-72.
49. Lowe JB, Balanda KP, Del Mar C, Hawes E. Psychologic distress in women with abnormal findings in mass mammography screening. Cancer. 1999;85:1114-1118.
50. Peters T, Somerset M, Baxter K, Wilkinson C. Anxiety among women with mild dyskaryosis: a randomized trial of an educational intervention. Br J Gen Pract. 1999;49:348-352.
51. Gustafsson O, Theorell T, Norming U, Perski A, Ohstrom M, Nyman CR. Psychological reactions in men screened for prostate cancer. Br J Urol. 1995;75:631-636.
52. Mant D, Fitzpatrick R, Hogg A, et al. Experiences of patients with false positive results from colorectal cancer screening. Br J Gen Pract. 1990;40:423-425.
53. Parker MA, Robinson MH, Scholefield JH, Hardcastle JD. Psychiatric morbidity and screening for colorectal cancer. J Med Screen. 2002;9:7-10.
54. Morris T, Greer S. Psychological characteristics of women electing to attend a breast screening clinic. Clin Oncol. 1982; 8:113-119.
55. Romsaas EP, Malec JF, Javenkoski BR, Trump DL, Wolberg WH. Psychological distress among women with breast problems. Cancer. 1986;57:890-895.
56. Scaf-Klomp W, Sanderman R, van de Wiel HB, Otter R, van den Heuvel WJ. Distressed or relieved? Psychological side effects of breast cancer screening in The Netherlands. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1997;51:705-710.
57. Brett J, Austoker J. Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting re-attendance. J Public Health Med. 2001;23:292-300.
58. Brett J, Austoker J, Ong G. Do women who undergo further investigation for breast screening suffer adverse psychological consequences? A multi-centre follow-up study comparing different breast screening result groups five months after their last breast screening appointment. J Public Health Med. 1998;20:396-403.
59. 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.
60. Wilkinson C, Jones JM, McBride J. Anxiety caused by abnormal result of cervical smear test: a controlled trial. BMJ. 1990;300:440.
61. Wolfe C, Doherty I, Raju KS, Holtom R, Richardson P. First steps in the development of an information and counselling service for women with an abnormal smear result. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1992;45:201-206.
62. Lerman C, Miller SM, Scarborough R, Hanjani P, Nolte S, Smith D. Adverse psychologic consequences of positive cytologic cervical screening. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991;165: 658-662.
63. Paskett ED, Rimer BK. Psychosocial effects of abnormal Pap tests and mammograms: a review. J Womens Health. 1995; 4:73-82.
64. Rimer BK, Bluman LG. The psychosocial consequences of mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997;22:131-138.
65. Gram IT, Lund E, Slenker SE. Quality of life following a false positive mammogram. Br J Cancer. 1990;62:1018-1022.
66. McDonald TW, Neutens JJ, Fischer LM, Jessee D. Impact of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia diagnosis and treatment on self-esteem and body image. Gynecol Oncol. 1989;34:345-349.
67. Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer BK, Boyce A, Jepson C, Engstrom PF. Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms. Ann Intern Med. 1991;114:657-661.
68. 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.
69. Miles AE, Cockburn J, Smith R, Wardle FJ. A perspective from countries using organized screening programs. Cancer. 2004;101(5 Suppl):1201-1213.
70. Cummings KM, Michalek A, Mettlin C, Mittelman A. Screening for colorectal cancer using the Hemoccult 11 stool guaiac slide test. Cancer. 1984;53:2201-2205.
71. Burack RC, Simon MS, Stano M, George J, Coombs J. Follow-up among women with an abnormal mammogram in an HMO: is it complete, timely, and efficient? Am J Manag Care. 2000;6:1102-1113.
72. Cardin VA, Grimes RM, Jiang ZD, Pomeroy N, Harrell L, Cano P. Low-income minority women at risk for cervical cancer: a process to improve adherence to follow-up recommendations. Public Health Rep. 2001;116:608-616.
73. Helvie MA, Pennes DR, Rebner M, Adler DD. Mammographic follow-up of low-suspicion lesions: compliance rate and diagnostic yield. Radiology. 1991;178:155-158.
74. Kavanagh AM, Simpson JM. Predicting nonattendance for colposcopy clinic follow-up after referral for an abnormal Pap smear. Aust N Z J Public Health. 1996;20:266-271.
75. Lerman C, Ross E, Boyce A, et al. The impact of mailing psychoeducational materials to women with abnormal mammograms. Am J Public Health. 1992;82:729-730.
76. 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.
77. Sainsbury R, Johnston C, Haward B. Effect on survival of delays in referral of patients with breast-cancer symptoms: a retrospective analysis. Lancet. 1999;353:1132-1135.
78. Coates AS. Breast cancer: delays, dilemmas, and delusions. Lancet. 1999;353:1112-1113.
79. Facione NC. Delay versus help seeking for breast cancer symptoms: a critical review of the literature on patient and provider delay. Soc Sci Med. 1993;36:1521-1534.
80. Mitchell H, Medley G. Adherence to recommendations for early repeat cervical smear tests. BMJ. 1989;298:1605-1607.
81. 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.
82. Goodman KA, Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM. Compliance with recommended follow-up after percutaneous breast core biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;170:89-92.
83. Palm BT, Kant AC, Visser EA, Vooijs GP, van den Bosch WJ, van Weel C. The effect of the family physician on improving follow-up after an abnormal Pap smear. Int J Qual Health Care. 1997;9:277-282.
84. Batal H, Biggerstaff S, Dunn T, Mehler PS. Cervical cancer screening in the urgent care setting. J Gen Intern Med. 2000; 15:389-394.
85. Lurie JD, Welch HG. Diagnostic testing following fecal occult blood screening in the elderly. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91: 1641-1646.
86. Gordon NP, Hiatt RA, Lampert DI. Concordance of self-reported data and medical record audit for six cancer screening procedures. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:566-570.
87. Hiatt RA, Perez-Stable EJ, Quesenberry C Jr., Sabogal F, Otero-Sabogal R, McPhee SJ. Agreement between self-reported early cancer detection practices and medical audits among Hispanic and non-Hispanic white health plan members in northern California. Prev Med. 1995;24:278-285.
88. McGovern PG, Lurie N, Margolis KL, Slater JS. Accuracy of self-report of mammography and Pap smear in a low-income urban population. Am J Prev Med. 1998;14:201-208.
89. Carey P, Gjerdingen DK. Follow-up of abnormal Papanicolaou smears among women of different races. J Fam Pract. 1993;37:583-587.
90. Haas JS, Cook EF, Puopolo AL, Burstin HR, Brennan TA. Differences in the quality of care for women with an abnormal mammogram or breast complaint. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:321-328.
91. Sienko DG, Hahn RA, Mills EM, et al. Mammography use and outcomes in a community. The Greater Lansing Area Mammography Study. Cancer. 1993;71:1801-1809.
92. Rimer BK, Briss PA, Zeller PK, Chan E, Woolf SH. Informed decision making: what is its role in cancer screening? Cancer. 2004;101(5 Suppl):1214-1228.