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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |