Cargando…

Impact of changes to cervical screening guidelines on age and interval at which women are tested: Population-based study

BACKGROUND: English cervical screening programme guidelines changed between 2009 and 2012. We explore the impact on the age and intervals at which women receive a cytology test. METHODS: Eligible women were controls from a population-based case–control study in England. Tests taken between 1980 and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Castanon, Alejandra, Sheikh, Shama, Pearmain, Philippa, Sasieni, Peter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8366121/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32862772
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969141320953446
_version_ 1783738846604689408
author Castanon, Alejandra
Sheikh, Shama
Pearmain, Philippa
Sasieni, Peter
author_facet Castanon, Alejandra
Sheikh, Shama
Pearmain, Philippa
Sasieni, Peter
author_sort Castanon, Alejandra
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: English cervical screening programme guidelines changed between 2009 and 2012. We explore the impact on the age and intervals at which women receive a cytology test. METHODS: Eligible women were controls from a population-based case–control study in England. Tests taken between 1980 and 2017 were extracted from the call/recall database. Using the Kaplan–Meier estimator by birth cohort and age at (or time since) last test, we explore proportions tested since or prior to a given age, years since previous test, and interval following a negative test. RESULTS: Screening histories from 46,037 women were included. Proportion tested by age 26 has increased from 55% among birth cohorts 1978–1979 to 67% among those born 1990–1991, despite more recent cohorts only having received one invitation (instead of two) prior to age 26. The proportion of women tested at aged 28 with a test three years earlier increased by 20% (from 36% in 1997–2006 to 56% in 2012–2017) whereas the proportion tested at ages 23–27 without a prior test increased from 34% to 80%. The age at last test prior to exiting the programme has decreased: among those born 1928–1931 86% had a test aged 60–65, but only 71% of those born 1947–1951. CONCLUSION: Clear programme guidance alongside quality assurance has improved the cervical screening programme by standardising the age and intervals at which women are screened.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8366121
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83661212021-08-17 Impact of changes to cervical screening guidelines on age and interval at which women are tested: Population-based study Castanon, Alejandra Sheikh, Shama Pearmain, Philippa Sasieni, Peter J Med Screen Original Articles BACKGROUND: English cervical screening programme guidelines changed between 2009 and 2012. We explore the impact on the age and intervals at which women receive a cytology test. METHODS: Eligible women were controls from a population-based case–control study in England. Tests taken between 1980 and 2017 were extracted from the call/recall database. Using the Kaplan–Meier estimator by birth cohort and age at (or time since) last test, we explore proportions tested since or prior to a given age, years since previous test, and interval following a negative test. RESULTS: Screening histories from 46,037 women were included. Proportion tested by age 26 has increased from 55% among birth cohorts 1978–1979 to 67% among those born 1990–1991, despite more recent cohorts only having received one invitation (instead of two) prior to age 26. The proportion of women tested at aged 28 with a test three years earlier increased by 20% (from 36% in 1997–2006 to 56% in 2012–2017) whereas the proportion tested at ages 23–27 without a prior test increased from 34% to 80%. The age at last test prior to exiting the programme has decreased: among those born 1928–1931 86% had a test aged 60–65, but only 71% of those born 1947–1951. CONCLUSION: Clear programme guidance alongside quality assurance has improved the cervical screening programme by standardising the age and intervals at which women are screened. SAGE Publications 2020-08-30 2021-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8366121/ /pubmed/32862772 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969141320953446 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Articles
Castanon, Alejandra
Sheikh, Shama
Pearmain, Philippa
Sasieni, Peter
Impact of changes to cervical screening guidelines on age and interval at which women are tested: Population-based study
title Impact of changes to cervical screening guidelines on age and interval at which women are tested: Population-based study
title_full Impact of changes to cervical screening guidelines on age and interval at which women are tested: Population-based study
title_fullStr Impact of changes to cervical screening guidelines on age and interval at which women are tested: Population-based study
title_full_unstemmed Impact of changes to cervical screening guidelines on age and interval at which women are tested: Population-based study
title_short Impact of changes to cervical screening guidelines on age and interval at which women are tested: Population-based study
title_sort impact of changes to cervical screening guidelines on age and interval at which women are tested: population-based study
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8366121/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32862772
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969141320953446
work_keys_str_mv AT castanonalejandra impactofchangestocervicalscreeningguidelinesonageandintervalatwhichwomenaretestedpopulationbasedstudy
AT sheikhshama impactofchangestocervicalscreeningguidelinesonageandintervalatwhichwomenaretestedpopulationbasedstudy
AT pearmainphilippa impactofchangestocervicalscreeningguidelinesonageandintervalatwhichwomenaretestedpopulationbasedstudy
AT sasienipeter impactofchangestocervicalscreeningguidelinesonageandintervalatwhichwomenaretestedpopulationbasedstudy