Evaluating Post-Treatment Screening in Women with Breast Cancer

Azadeh Stark phd, Angela Prince mph , Gena Kucera mph , Mei Lu phd, Usha Raju md , David Nathanson md
{"title":"Evaluating Post-Treatment Screening in Women with Breast Cancer","authors":"Azadeh Stark \n phd,&nbsp;Angela Prince \n mph\n ,&nbsp;Gena Kucera \n mph\n ,&nbsp;Mei Lu \n phd,&nbsp;Usha Raju \n md\n ,&nbsp;David Nathanson \n md","doi":"10.1046/j.1523-5394.2002.105001.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><b><span>purpose:</span></b> The objective of this study was to evaluate the 5-year post-treatment use rate for screening mammography and clinical breast examination (CBE) among women treated for atypical hyperplasia (AH) or carcinoma in situ (CIS).</p><p><b><span>description of study:</span></b> A total of 103 women, who had received diagnoses and had been treated for primary AH or CIS, were observed for 5 years through a review of medical records and electronic databases. Adequate screening use was defined as the patient undergoing one mammography examination and at least one CBE per year.</p><p><b><span>results:</span></b> Multivariate logistic regression showed that screening activity declined significantly with time. During the first year, 83.5% and 80.6%, respectively, of women were screened by CBE and mammography. By year 2, CBE screening had dropped by 25.2% (<i>P</i> &lt; .01) and mammography screening by 9.7% (<i>P</i> = .08). Attrition in CBE and mammography screening continued for each consecutive year and was significant (<i>P</i> &lt; .01). During the first year, 70.9% of women received both methods of screening, which declined to 9.7% by year 5. Women who had received diagnoses of CIS and those married with children were more likely to use post-treatment screening, while fee-for-service insurance was negatively associated with screening.</p><p><b><span>clinical implications:</span></b> The reasons for the observed decline in the annual post-treatment screening are not known. Negative findings from follow-up screenings might have lowered the perception of cancer susceptibility and promoted the decline in screening use. A communication gap between physicians and patients might have reinforced this perception. The importance of annual screening may be verbally emphasized at each clinic visit, and reminder notes and telephone calls may be used to remind patients of upcoming screenings. Additional studies are planned to evaluate the effect of various intervention strategies in improving post-treatment screening use.</p>","PeriodicalId":79323,"journal":{"name":"Cancer practice","volume":"10 5","pages":"228-233"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1046/j.1523-5394.2002.105001.x","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1523-5394.2002.105001.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate the 5-year post-treatment use rate for screening mammography and clinical breast examination (CBE) among women treated for atypical hyperplasia (AH) or carcinoma in situ (CIS).

description of study: A total of 103 women, who had received diagnoses and had been treated for primary AH or CIS, were observed for 5 years through a review of medical records and electronic databases. Adequate screening use was defined as the patient undergoing one mammography examination and at least one CBE per year.

results: Multivariate logistic regression showed that screening activity declined significantly with time. During the first year, 83.5% and 80.6%, respectively, of women were screened by CBE and mammography. By year 2, CBE screening had dropped by 25.2% (P < .01) and mammography screening by 9.7% (P = .08). Attrition in CBE and mammography screening continued for each consecutive year and was significant (P < .01). During the first year, 70.9% of women received both methods of screening, which declined to 9.7% by year 5. Women who had received diagnoses of CIS and those married with children were more likely to use post-treatment screening, while fee-for-service insurance was negatively associated with screening.

clinical implications: The reasons for the observed decline in the annual post-treatment screening are not known. Negative findings from follow-up screenings might have lowered the perception of cancer susceptibility and promoted the decline in screening use. A communication gap between physicians and patients might have reinforced this perception. The importance of annual screening may be verbally emphasized at each clinic visit, and reminder notes and telephone calls may be used to remind patients of upcoming screenings. Additional studies are planned to evaluate the effect of various intervention strategies in improving post-treatment screening use.

评价乳腺癌妇女治疗后筛查
目的:本研究的目的是评估治疗不典型增生(AH)或原位癌(CIS)的女性5年后筛查乳房x线摄影和临床乳房检查(CBE)的使用情况。研究描述:通过回顾医疗记录和电子数据库,共观察了103名确诊并治疗原发性AH或CIS的女性5年。充分的筛查使用定义为患者每年接受一次乳房x光检查和至少一次CBE。结果:多因素logistic回归显示,筛查活性随时间明显下降。在第一年,分别有83.5%和80.6%的妇女接受了CBE和乳房x光检查。到第二年,CBE筛查率下降了25.2% (P <.01),乳房x线摄影筛查率为9.7% (P = .08)。CBE和乳房x光检查的减少持续每年,且具有显著性(P <. 01)。在第一年,70.9%的妇女接受了两种筛查方法,到第5年下降到9.7%。接受过CIS诊断的妇女和已婚有孩子的妇女更有可能进行治疗后筛查,而按服务收费的保险与筛查呈负相关。临床意义:观察到的每年治疗后筛查下降的原因尚不清楚。后续筛查的阴性结果可能降低了对癌症易感性的认识,并促进了筛查使用的下降。医生和病人之间的沟通差距可能加强了这种看法。每年筛查的重要性可在每次就诊时口头强调,并可使用提醒便条和电话提醒患者即将进行的筛查。计划进行更多的研究来评估各种干预策略在改善治疗后筛查使用方面的效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信