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

The potential reduction in morbidity and mortality through cancer screening cannot be realized without receipt of appropriate follow‐up care for abnormalities identified via screening. In this paper, the authors critically examine the existing literature on correlates of receipt of appropriate follow‐up care for screen‐detected abnormalities, as well as the literature on interventions designed to increase rates of receipt of follow‐up care. Lessons learned describe what is known and not known about factors that are related to or predict receipt of follow‐up care. Similarly, effective interventions to increase follow‐up are described and gaps identified. A conceptual model is developed that categorizes the health care system in the United States as comprising four levels: policy, practice, provider, and patient. Some patient‐level factors that influence follow‐up receipt are identified, but the lack of data severely limit the understanding of provider, practice, and policy‐level correlates. The majority of intervention studies to increase follow‐up receipt have focused on patient‐level factors and have targeted follow‐up of abnormal Papanicolaou smears. Insufficient information is available regarding the effectiveness of provider, practice, or policy‐level interventions. Standard definitions of what constitutes appropriate follow‐up are lacking, which severely limit comparability of findings across studies. The validity of various methods of obtaining outcome data has not been clearly established. More research is needed on interventions targeting provider, system, and policy‐level factors, particularly interventions focusing on follow‐up of colorectal and breast abnormalities. Standardization of definitions and measures is needed to facilitate comparisons across studies. Cancer 2004. Published 2004 by the American Cancer Society.

[1]  Amy Leader,et al.  Is the Promise of Cancer-Screening Programs Being Compromised? Quality of Follow-Up Care after Abnormal Screening Results , 2003, Medical care research and review : MCRR.

[2]  Jennifer S. Haas,et al.  Differences in the quality of care for women with an abnormal mammogram or breast complaint , 2000, Journal of general internal medicine.

[3]  J. Nissly,et al.  Abnormal mammogram follow-up: a pilot study women with low income. , 2002, Cancer practice.

[4]  J. Mandelblatt,et al.  Targeting breast and cervical cancer screening to elderly poor black women: who will participate? The Harlem Study Team. , 1993, Preventive medicine.

[5]  R. Hiatt,et al.  Agreement between self-reported early cancer detection practices and medical audits among Hispanic and non-Hispanic white health plan members in northern California. , 1995, Preventive medicine.

[6]  L. J. van der Kamp,et al.  False-positive findings in mammography screening induces short-term distress - breast cancer-specific concern prevails longer. , 2000, European journal of cancer.

[7]  C. van Weel,et al.  The effect of the family physician on improving follow-up after an abnormal PAP smear. , 1997, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[8]  E. Makariou,et al.  Realizing the promise of breast cancer screening: clinical follow-up after abnormal screening among Black women. , 2003, Preventive medicine.

[9]  Gifford Ms,et al.  Quality, access, and clinical issues in a nurse practitioner colposcopy outreach program. , 1993 .

[10]  M. Prislin,et al.  On-site Colposcopy Services in a Family Practice Residency Clinic: Impact on Physician Test-Ordering Behavior, Patient Compliance, and Practice Revenue Generation , 1997, The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.

[11]  A. Farmer,et al.  Experiences of patients with false positive results from colorectal cancer screening. , 1990, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[12]  E A Sickles,et al.  Computerized follow-up of abnormalities detected at mammography screening. , 1990, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[13]  B. Rimer,et al.  Psychosocial effects of abnormal Pap tests and mammograms: A review , 1995 .

[14]  S. Greer,et al.  Psychological characteristics of women electing to attend a breast screening clinic. , 1982, Clinical oncology.

[15]  J. Berek,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 , 1992, Medical care.

[16]  Terry Hyslop,et al.  Impact of a physician-oriented intervention on follow-up in colorectal cancer screening. , 2004, Preventive medicine.

[17]  J. Neutens,et al.  Impact of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia diagnosis and treatment on self-esteem and body image. , 1989, Gynecologic oncology.

[18]  Low-Income Minority Women at Risk for Cervical Cancer: A Process to Improve Adherence to Follow-up Recommendations , 2001 .

[19]  L. Frisch Effectiveness of a case management protocol in improving follow-up and referral of Papanicolaou smears indicating cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. , 1986, Journal of American college health : J of ACH.

[20]  A. Kavanagh,et al.  Predicting nonattendance for colposcopy clinic follow‐up after referral for an abnormal Pap smear , 1996, Australian and New Zealand journal of public health.

[21]  K. Nasseri,et al.  Low-Income Women with Cervical Abnormalities: Individual and System Factors Affecting Follow-up , 1995 .

[22]  Jasmin A. Tiro,et al.  Some methodologic lessons learned from cancer screening research , 2004, Cancer.

[23]  P. Littlejohns,et al.  Influence of delay on survival in patients with breast cancer: a systematic review , 1999, The Lancet.

[24]  L. Crane,et al.  Social support and adherence behavior among women with abnormal Pap smears. , 2009, Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education.

[25]  R. Hiatt,et al.  Abnormal Pap smear follow-up in a high-risk population. , 2001, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[26]  K. Nasseri,et al.  Improving follow-up after an abnormal pap smear: results from a quasi-experimental intervention study. , 2000, Journal of women's health & gender-based medicine.

[27]  J. Berek,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. , 1998, Medical care.

[28]  N. Lurie,et al.  Accuracy of self-report of mammography and Pap smear in a low-income urban population. , 1998, American journal of preventive medicine.

[29]  J Austoker,et al.  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. , 1998, Journal of public health medicine.

[30]  B. Chan,et al.  Do follow-up recommendations for abnormal Papanicolaou smears influence patient adherence? , 1999, Archives of family medicine.

[31]  B. McCarthy,et al.  Patient notification and follow-up of abnormal test results. A physician survey. , 1996, Archives of internal medicine.

[32]  J Austoker,et al.  Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting re-attendance. , 2001, Journal of public health medicine.

[33]  R. Warnecke,et al.  Results of an intervention to improve compliance with referrals for evaluation of suspected malignancies at neighborhood public health centers. , 1990, American journal of public health.

[34]  C. Wilkinson,et al.  Anxiety caused by abnormal result of cervical smear test: a controlled trial. , 1990, BMJ.

[35]  C. Klabunde,et al.  Health plan policies and programs for colorectal cancer screening: a national profile. , 2004, The American journal of managed care.

[36]  C. Holschneider,et al.  A single‐visit cervical carcinoma prevention program offered at an inner city church , 1999, Cancer.

[37]  J. Shelley,et al.  PEAPS-Q: a questionnaire to measure the psychosocial effects of having an abnormal pap smear. Psychosocial Effects of Abnormal Pap Smears Questionnaire. , 1995, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[38]  B. Block,et al.  Efforts to Improve the Follow-up of Patients With Abnormal Papanicolaou Test Results , 1998, The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.

[39]  J. Elmore,et al.  Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. , 1998, The New England journal of medicine.

[40]  Suzanne M. Miller,et al.  Telephone counseling improves adherence to colposcopy among lower-income minority women. , 1992, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[41]  M A Helvie,et al.  Mammographic follow-up of low-suspicion lesions: compliance rate and diagnostic yield. , 1991, Radiology.

[42]  Charles Wolfe,et al.  First steps in the development of an information and counselling service for women with an abnormal smear result. , 1992, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[43]  K. Balanda,et al.  Psychologic distress in women with abnormal findings in mass mammography screening , 1999, Cancer.

[44]  B. Rimer,et al.  The impact of mailing psychoeducational materials to women with abnormal mammograms. , 1992, American journal of public health.

[45]  B. Rimer,et al.  Psychosocial impact of cancer screening. , 1993, Oncology.

[46]  H. Freeman,et al.  Expanding access to cancer screening and clinical follow-up among the medically underserved. , 1995, Cancer practice.

[47]  W. Chey,et al.  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. , 2000, The American journal of gastroenterology.

[48]  K. Baxter,et al.  Anxiety among women with mild dyskaryosis: a randomized trial of an educational intervention. , 1999, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[49]  B. Rimer,et al.  Informed decision making: What is its role in cancer screening? , 2004, Cancer.

[50]  J. George,et al.  Follow-up among women with an abnormal mammogram in an HMO: is it complete, timely, and efficient? , 2000, The American journal of managed care.

[51]  van den Wim Heuvel,et al.  Distressed or relieved? Psychological side effects of breast cancer screening in The Netherlands. , 1997, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[52]  M. Dignan,et al.  The Forsyth County Cervical Cancer Prevention Project--II. Compliance with screening follow-up of abnormal cervical smears. , 1994, Health education research.

[53]  T Hyslop,et al.  Physician intention to recommend complete diagnostic evaluation in colorectal cancer screening. , 1999, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[54]  D. Ikeda,et al.  Compliance with recommended follow-up after percutaneous breast core biopsy. , 1998, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[55]  J. Wardle,et al.  A perspective from countries using organized screening programs , 2004, Cancer.

[56]  S. Bull,et al.  Disseminating effective cancer screening interventions , 2004, Cancer.

[57]  A. Gelfand,et al.  Predicting the cumulative risk of false-positive mammograms. , 2000, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[58]  Welch Hg,et al.  Diagnostic Testing Following Fecal Occult Blood Screening in the Elderly , 1999 .

[59]  R. Hiatt,et al.  Concordance of self-reported data and medical record audit for six cancer screening procedures. , 1993, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[60]  H. Kitchener,et al.  Psychological response to cervical screening. , 1995, Preventive medicine.

[61]  D. Gjerdingen,et al.  Follow-up of abnormal Papanicolaou smears among women of different races. , 1993, The Journal of family practice.

[62]  P. Curtis,et al.  Development of a Pap smear quality-assurance system in family practice. , 1993, Family Medicine.

[63]  H. Mitchell,et al.  Adherence to recommendations for early repeat cervical smear tests. , 1989, BMJ.

[64]  L. Lacey,et al.  Referral adherence in an inner city breast and cervical cancer screening program , 1993, Cancer.

[65]  T. Theorell,et al.  Psychological reactions in men screened for prostate cancer. , 1995, British journal of urology.

[66]  S. Nolte,et al.  Adverse psychologic consequences of positive cytologic cervical screening. , 1991, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[67]  A. Coates Breast cancer: delays, dilemmas, and delusions , 1999, The Lancet.

[68]  M. McKee,et al.  Barriers to follow-up of abnormal Papanicolaou smears in an urban community health center. , 1999, Archives of family medicine.

[69]  R. Michielutte,et al.  Noncompliance in screening follow-up among family planning clinic patients with cervical dysplasia. , 1985, Preventive medicine.

[70]  D. Lauver,et al.  Message framing, dispositional optimism, and follow-up for abnormal Papanicolaou tests. , 1990, Research in nursing & health.

[71]  K. Cummings,et al.  Screening for colorectal cancer using the hemoccult II stool guaiac slide test , 1984, Cancer.

[72]  Barbara L. Funke,et al.  Factors affecting patient compliance among women with abnormal Pap smears. , 1993, Patient education and counseling.

[73]  W. Hauck,et al.  Measuring complete diagnostic evaluation in colorectal cancer screening. , 2001, Cancer detection and prevention.

[74]  S. Teutsch,et al.  Mammography use and outcomes in a community the greater lansing area mammography study , 1993, Cancer.

[75]  R. Myers,et al.  Screening for colorectal neoplasia: physicians' adherence to complete diagnostic evaluation. , 1993, American journal of public health.

[76]  D. Lauver,et al.  Women's uncertainties, coping, and moods regarding abnormal papanicolaou results. , 1999, Journal of women's health & gender-based medicine.

[77]  K. Kerlikowske,et al.  Racial differences in timeliness of follow‐up after abnormal screening mammography , 1996, Cancer.

[78]  B D McCarthy,et al.  Inadequate follow-up of abnormal mammograms. , 1996, American journal of preventive medicine.

[79]  Suzanne M. Miller,et al.  Enhancing adherence following abnormal Pap smears among low-income minority women: a preventive telephone counseling strategy. , 1997, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[80]  E. Paskett,et al.  Improving follow-up after an abnormal Pap smear: a randomized controlled trial. , 1990, Preventive medicine.

[81]  J. Scholefield,et al.  Psychiatric morbidity and screening for colorectal cancer , 2002, Journal of medical screening.

[82]  B. Rimer,et al.  The psychosocial consequences of mammography. , 1997, Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs.

[83]  Michael E. Miller,et al.  Improving Compliance Among Women With Abnormal Papanicolaou Smears , 1995, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[84]  B. Trock,et al.  Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms. , 1991, Annals of internal medicine.

[85]  I. Gram,et al.  Quality of life following a false positive mammogram. , 1990, British Journal of Cancer.

[86]  B. Haward,et al.  Effect on survival of delays in referral of patients with breast-cancer symptoms: a retrospective analysis , 1999, The Lancet.

[87]  N. Facione Delay versus help seeking for breast cancer symptoms: a critical review of the literature on patient and provider delay. , 1993, Social science & medicine.

[88]  W. Wolberg,et al.  Psychological distress among women with breast problems , 1986, Cancer.

[89]  M. Gusmano,et al.  Exploring the limits of the safety net: community health centers and care for the uninsured. , 2002, Health affairs.