Cargando…
An audit of adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines in a tertiary-level HIV clinic
BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the most common malignancy affecting South African women aged 15–44 years, with a higher prevalence among women living with HIV (WLWH). Despite recommendations for a screening target of 70%, the reported rate of cervical cancer screening in South Africa is 19.3%. OBJEC...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
AOSIS
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10244942/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37293604 http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajhivmed.v24i1.1490 |
_version_ | 1785054758701105152 |
---|---|
author | Bolon, Jeffrey Samson, Amy Irwin, Natalie Murray, Lyle Mbodi, Langanani Stacey, Sarah Aikman, Nicholas Moonsamy, Louell Zamparini, Jarrod |
author_facet | Bolon, Jeffrey Samson, Amy Irwin, Natalie Murray, Lyle Mbodi, Langanani Stacey, Sarah Aikman, Nicholas Moonsamy, Louell Zamparini, Jarrod |
author_sort | Bolon, Jeffrey |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the most common malignancy affecting South African women aged 15–44 years, with a higher prevalence among women living with HIV (WLWH). Despite recommendations for a screening target of 70%, the reported rate of cervical cancer screening in South Africa is 19.3%. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the adherence of healthcare workers to cervical cancer screening guidelines in a tertiary-level HIV clinic. METHOD: A retrospective cross-sectional record audit of women attending the Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital HIV Clinic over a 1-month period. RESULTS: Out of 403 WLWH who attended the clinic, 180 (44.7%) were screened for cervical cancer in the 3 years prior to the index consultation. Only 115 (51.6%) of those women with no record of prior screening were subsequently referred for screening. Women who had undergone screening in the previous 3 years were significantly older (47 years vs 44 years, P = 0.046) and had a longer time since diagnosis of their HIV (12 years vs 10 years, P = 0.001) compared to women who had not undergone screening. There was no significant difference in CD4 count or viral suppression between women who had and had not undergone screening. CONCLUSION: The rate of cervical cancer screening in our institution is below that recommended by the World Health Organization and the South African National Department of Health. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10244942 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | AOSIS |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102449422023-06-08 An audit of adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines in a tertiary-level HIV clinic Bolon, Jeffrey Samson, Amy Irwin, Natalie Murray, Lyle Mbodi, Langanani Stacey, Sarah Aikman, Nicholas Moonsamy, Louell Zamparini, Jarrod South Afr J HIV Med Original Research BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the most common malignancy affecting South African women aged 15–44 years, with a higher prevalence among women living with HIV (WLWH). Despite recommendations for a screening target of 70%, the reported rate of cervical cancer screening in South Africa is 19.3%. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the adherence of healthcare workers to cervical cancer screening guidelines in a tertiary-level HIV clinic. METHOD: A retrospective cross-sectional record audit of women attending the Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital HIV Clinic over a 1-month period. RESULTS: Out of 403 WLWH who attended the clinic, 180 (44.7%) were screened for cervical cancer in the 3 years prior to the index consultation. Only 115 (51.6%) of those women with no record of prior screening were subsequently referred for screening. Women who had undergone screening in the previous 3 years were significantly older (47 years vs 44 years, P = 0.046) and had a longer time since diagnosis of their HIV (12 years vs 10 years, P = 0.001) compared to women who had not undergone screening. There was no significant difference in CD4 count or viral suppression between women who had and had not undergone screening. CONCLUSION: The rate of cervical cancer screening in our institution is below that recommended by the World Health Organization and the South African National Department of Health. AOSIS 2023-05-26 /pmc/articles/PMC10244942/ /pubmed/37293604 http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajhivmed.v24i1.1490 Text en © 2023. The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee: AOSIS. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Bolon, Jeffrey Samson, Amy Irwin, Natalie Murray, Lyle Mbodi, Langanani Stacey, Sarah Aikman, Nicholas Moonsamy, Louell Zamparini, Jarrod An audit of adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines in a tertiary-level HIV clinic |
title | An audit of adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines in a tertiary-level HIV clinic |
title_full | An audit of adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines in a tertiary-level HIV clinic |
title_fullStr | An audit of adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines in a tertiary-level HIV clinic |
title_full_unstemmed | An audit of adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines in a tertiary-level HIV clinic |
title_short | An audit of adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines in a tertiary-level HIV clinic |
title_sort | audit of adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines in a tertiary-level hiv clinic |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10244942/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37293604 http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajhivmed.v24i1.1490 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bolonjeffrey anauditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT samsonamy anauditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT irwinnatalie anauditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT murraylyle anauditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT mbodilanganani anauditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT staceysarah anauditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT aikmannicholas anauditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT moonsamylouell anauditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT zamparinijarrod anauditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT bolonjeffrey auditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT samsonamy auditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT irwinnatalie auditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT murraylyle auditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT mbodilanganani auditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT staceysarah auditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT aikmannicholas auditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT moonsamylouell auditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic AT zamparinijarrod auditofadherencetocervicalcancerscreeningguidelinesinatertiarylevelhivclinic |