The costs of an outreach intervention for low-income women with abnormal Pap smears

Preventing Chronic Disease

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2007, Pages

  Wagner, Todd H ^a,b   Engelstad, Linda P ^d   McPhee, Stephen J ^c   Pasick, Rena J ^c  

^a VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d ALAMEDA COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; POVERTY; PUBLIC RELATIONS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; UNITED STATES; UTERINE CERVIX TUMOR; VAGINA SMEAR;

CALIFORNIA; COMMUNITY-INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; POVERTY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 84978420276     PISSN: 15451151     EISSN: 21665435     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for cervical cancer. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality;[cited 2006 Jul 19]. Available from: http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstf/uspscerv.htm
2. Brown AD, Garber AM. Cost-effectiveness of 3 methods to enhance the sensitivity of Papanicolaou testing. JAMA 1999;281(4):347-53.
3. Mandelblatt JS, Fahs MC. The cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening for low-income elderly women. JAMA 1988;259(16):2409-13.
4. Mandelblatt J, Gopaul I, Wistreich M. Gynecological care of elderly women. Another look at Papanicolaou smear testing. JAMA 1986;256(3):367-71.
5. Kulasingam SL, Myers ER, Lawson HW, McConnell KJ, Kerlikowske K, Melnikow J, et al. Cost-effectiveness of extending cervical cancer screening intervals among women with prior normal pap tests. Obstet Gynecol 2006;107(2 Pt 1):321-8.
6. Goldie SJ, Kuhn L, Denny L, Pollack A, Wright TC. Policy analysis of cervical cancer screening strategies in low-resource settings: clinical benefits and costeffectiveness. [Published erratum in: JAMA 2001;286(9):1026]. JAMA 2001;285(24):3107-15.
7. Goldie SJ, Gaffikin L, Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, Gordillo-Tobar A, Levin C, Mahe C, et al. Cost-effectiveness of cervical-cancer screening in five developing countries. N Engl J Med 2005;353(20):2158-68.
8. 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(3):112-5.
9. Engelstad LP, Stewart SL, Nguyen BH, Bedeian KL, Rubin MM, Pasick RJ, et al. Abnormal Pap smear follow-up in a high-risk population. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001;10(10):1015-20.
10. Melnikow J, Chan BK, Stewart GK. Do follow-up recommendations for abnormal Papanicolaou smears influence patient adherence? Arch Fam Med 1999;8(6):510-4.
11. Hogness CG, Engelstad LP, Linck LM, Schorr KA. Cervical cancer screening in an urban emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 1992;21(8):933-9.
12. 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(7):779-90.
13. Marcus AC, Crane LA, Kaplan CP, Reading AE, Savage E, Gunning J, 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(3):216-30.
14. 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(10):703-8.
15. Engelstad LP, Stewart S, Otero-Sabogal R, Leung MS, Davis PI, Pasick RJ. The effectiveness of a community outreach intervention to improve follow-up among underserved women at highest risk for cervical cancer. Prev Med 2005;41(3-4):741-8.
16. Basic facts: popular tables and maps for the U.S., states, counties, cities, towns, and American Indian reservations. Washington (DC): U.S. Census Bureau;[cited 2006 Jul 19]. Available from: http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/BasicFactsServlet?_basicfacts=2
17. FY 2004 Prospective Payment System payment impact file (August 2003 Update). Baltimore (MD): Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services;[cited 2006 Jul 19]. Available from: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/AcuteInpatientPPS/downloads/impact_rec_lay.pdf
18. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, Moriarty A, O'Connor D, Prey M, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002;287(16):2114-9.
19. Strecher V, Rosenstock IM. The health belief model. In: Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer BK, eds. Behavior and health education: theory, research and practice. 2nd ed. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bass; 1997. p: 41-59.
20. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Engelwood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice Hall; 1986.
21. Phibbs CS, Luft HS. Correlation of travel time on roads versus straight line distance. Med Care Res Rev 1995;52(4):532-42.
22. Federal Register. Federal Travel Regulation Amendment 2005-01, Case 2005-301. Washington (DC): U.S. General Services Administration; 2005.
23. U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics [homepage on the Internet]. Washington (DC). Available from: www.bls.gov [cited 2006 Oct 16].
24. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC, eds. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York (NY): Oxford University Press; 1996.
25. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. National patient care data base. Available from: www.virec.research.va.gov/datasourcesname/npcd/npc d.htm [cited 2006 Oct 16].
26. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ. An introduction to the bootstrap. London (UK): Chapman & Hall; 1994.
27. Salary.com Waltham (MA): Salary.com, Inc.;[cited 2003 Jun 11].
28. Andersen MR, Hager M, Su C, Urban N. Analysis of the cost-effectiveness of mammography promotion by volunteers in rural communities. Health Educ Behav 2002;29(6):755-70.
29. Stewart DE, Buchegger PM, Lickrish GM, Sierra S. The effect of educational brochures on follow-up compliance in women with abnormal Papanicolaou smears. Obstet Gynecol 1994;83(4):583-5.
30. Denny L, Kuhn L, De Souza M, Pollack AE, Dupree W, Wright TC Jr. Screen-and-treat approaches for cervical cancer prevention in low-resource settings: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2005;294(17):2173-81.
31. Brewster WR, Hubbell FA, Largent J, Ziogas A, Lin F, Howe S, et al. Feasibility of management of high-grade cervical lesions in a single visit: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2005;294(17):2182-7.