Dataset Information

Clinical follow-up practices after cervical cancer screening by co-testing: A population-based study of adherence to U.S. guideline recommendations.

ABSTRACT: Failure to follow-up women after abnormal cervical screening could lead to cervical cancers, yet little is known about adherence to recommended follow-up after abnormal co-testing [cytology and high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) testing]. We documented clinical management following cervical screening by co-testing in a diverse population-based setting. A statewide surveillance program for cervical screening, diagnosis, and treatment was used to investigate all cytology, hrHPV and biopsy reports in the state of New Mexico from January 2015 through August 2019. Guideline-adherent follow-up after co-testing required 1) biopsy within 6 months for low-grade cytology if positive for hrHPV, for high-grade cytology irrespective of hrHPV, and for HPV 16/18 positive results irrespective of cytology and; 2) repeat co-testing within 18 months if cytology was negative and hrHPV test was positive (excluding types 16/18). Screening co-tests (2015-2017) for 164,522 women were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Kaplan Meier curves, and pairwise comparisons between groups. Guideline adherence was highest when both cytology and hrHPV tests were abnormal, ranging from 61.7% to 80.3%. Guideline-adherent follow-up was lower for discordant results. Women with high-grade cytology were less likely to receive a timely biopsy when hrHPV-testing was negative (48.1%) versus positive (83.3%) (p < 0.001). Only 47.9% of women received biopsies following detection of HPV16/18 with normal cytology, and 30.8% received no follow-up within 18-months. Among women with hrHPV-positive normal cytology without evidence of HPV 16/18 infection, 51% received no follow-up within 18 months. Provider education and creation of robust recall systems may help ensure appropriate follow-up of abnormal screening results.

SUBMITTER: Perkins RB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8595756 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceLung cancer screening (LCS) can reduce lung cancer mortality with close follow-up and adherence to management recommendations. Little is known about factors associated with adherence to LCS in real-world practice, with data limited to case series from selected LCS programs.ObjectiveTo analyze adherence to follow-up based on standardized follow-up recommendations in a national cohort and to identify factors associated with delayed or absent follow-up.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) facilities across the US. Veterans were screened for lung cancer between 2015 to 2019 with sufficient follow-up time to receive recommended evaluation. Patient- and facility-level logistic regression analyses were performed. Data were analyzed from November 26, 2019, to December 16, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresReceipt of the recommended next step after initial LCS according to Lung CT Screening Reporting & Data System (Lung-RADS) category, as captured in VHA or Medicare claims.ResultsOf 28 294 veterans (26 835 [94.8%] men; 21 969 individuals [77.6%] were White; mean [SD] age, 65.2 [5.5] years) who had an initial LCS examination, 17 863 veterans (63.1%) underwent recommended follow-up within the expected timeframe, whereas 3696 veterans (13.1%) underwent late evaluation, and 4439 veterans (15.7%) had no apparent evaluation. Facility-level differences were associated with 9.2% of the observed variation in rates of late or absent evaluation. In multivariable-adjusted models, Black veterans (odds ratio [OR], 1.19 [95% CI, 1.10-1.29]), veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (OR, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.03-1.23]), veterans with substance use disorders (OR, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.01-1.22]), veterans with lower income (OR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.79-0.98]), and those living at a greater distance from a VHA facility (OR, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.02-1.10]) were more likely to experience delayed or no follow-up; veterans with higher risk findings (Lung-RADS category 4 vs Lung-RADS category 1: OR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.28-0.43]) and those screened in high LCS volume facilities (OR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.21-0.67]) or academic facilities (OR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.80-0.92]) were less likely to experience delayed or no follow-up. In sensitivity analyses, varying how stringently adherence was defined, expected evaluation ranged from 14 486 veterans (49.7%) under stringent definitions to 20 578 veterans (78.8%) under liberal definitions.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study that captured follow-up care from the integrated VHA health care system and Medicare, less than two-thirds of patients received timely recommended follow-up after initial LCS, with higher risk of delayed or absent follow-up among marginalized populations, such as Black individuals, individuals with mental health disorders, and individuals with low income, that have long experienced disparities in lung cancer outcomes. Future work should focus on identifying facilities that promote high adherence and disseminating successful strategies to promote equity in LCS among marginalized populations.

Project description:BackgroundAfter a stroke, a person has an increased risk of recurrent strokes. Effective secondary prevention can provide significant gains in the form of reduced disability and mortality. While considerable efforts have been made to provide high quality acute treatment of stroke, there has been less focus on the follow-up in general practice after the stroke. One strategy for the implementation of high quality, evidence-based treatment is the development and distribution of clinical guidelines. However, from similar fields of practice, we know that guidelines are often not adhered to. The purpose of this study was to investigate to what degree patients who have suffered a stroke are followed up in general practice, if recommendations in the national guidelines are followed, and if patients achieve the treatment goals recommended in the guidelines.MethodsThe study included patients with cerebral infarction identified by the ICD-10 discharge diagnoses I63.0 trough I63.9 in two Norwegian local hospitals. In total 51 patients participated. They were listed with general practitioners in 18 different clinics. The material consists of the general practitioners' (GPs') medical records for these patients in the first year of follow-up; in total 381 consultations.ResultsOf the 381 consultations during the first year of follow-up, 71 (19%) had stroke as the main topic. The blood pressure (BP) target value < 140/90 mmHg was reached by 24 patients (47%). The low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol target value < 2.0 mmol/L was reached by 14 (27%) of the 51 patients. In total six patients (12%) got advice on physical activity and three (6%) received dietary advice. No advice about alcohol consumption was recorded.ConclusionsThe findings support earlier claims that the development and distribution of guidelines alone is not enough to implement a certain practice. Despite being a serious condition, stroke gets limited attention in the first year of follow-up in general practice. This can be explained by the complexity of general practice, where even a serious condition loses the competition for attention to other apparently equally important issues.

Project description:BackgroundPatients presenting with acute shortness of breath and chest pain should be managed according to guideline recommendations. Serious games can be used to train clinical reasoning. However, only few studies have used outcomes beyond student satisfaction, and most of the published evidence is based on short-term follow-up. This study investigated the effectiveness of a digital simulation of an emergency ward regarding appropriate clinical decision-making.MethodsIn this prospective trial that ran from summer 2017 to winter 2018/19 at Göttingen Medical University Centre, a total of 178 students enrolled in either the fourth or the fifth year of undergraduate medical education took six 90-min sessions of playing a serious game ('training phase') in which they managed virtual patients presenting with various conditions. Learning outcome was assessed by analysing log-files of in-game activity (including choice of diagnostic methods, differential diagnosis and treatment initiation) with regard to history taking and patient management in three virtual patient cases: Non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), pulmonary embolism (PE) and hypertensive crisis. Fourth-year students were followed up for 1.5 years, and their final performance was compared to the performance of students who had never been exposed to the game but had otherwise taken the same five-year undergraduate course.ResultsDuring the training phase, overall performance scores increased from 57.6 ± 1.1% to 65.5 ± 1.2% (p < 0.001; effect size 0.656). Performance remained stable over 1.5 years, and the final assessment revealed a strong impact of ever-exposure to the game on management scores (72.6 ± 1.2% vs. 63.5 ± 2.1%, p < 0.001; effect size 0.811). Pre-exposed students were more than twice as likely to correctly diagnose NSTEMI and PE and showed significantly greater adherence to guideline recommendations (e.g., troponin measurement and D-dimer testing in suspected PE).ConclusionsThe considerable difference observed between previously exposed and unexposed students suggests a long-term effect of using the game although retention of specific virtual patient cases rather than general principles might partially account for this effect. Thus, the game may foster the implementation of guideline recommendations.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Specialized acute treatment and high-quality follow-up is meant to reduce mortality and disability from stroke. While the acute treatment for stroke takes place in hospitals, the follow-up of stroke survivors largely takes place in general practice. National guidelines give recommendations for the follow-up. However, previous studies suggest that guidelines are not sufficiently adhered to. It has been suggested that this might be due to the complexity of general practice. A part of this complexity is constituted by patients' multimorbidity; the presence of two or more chronic conditions in the same person. In this study we investigated the extent of multimorbidity among stroke survivors residing in the communities. The aim was to assess the implications of multimorbidity for the follow-up of stroke in general practice. METHODS:The study was a cross sectional analysis of the prevalence of multimorbidity among stroke survivors in Mid-Norway. We included 51 patients, listed with general practitioners in 18 different clinics. The material consists of the general practitioners' medical records for these patients. The medical records for each patient were reviewed in a search for diagnoses corresponding to a predefined list of morbidities, resulting in a list of chronic conditions for each participant. These 51 lists were the basis for the subsequent analysis. In this analysis we modelled different hypothetical patients and assessed the implications of adhering to all clinical guidelines affecting their diseases. RESULT:All 51 patients met the criteria for multimorbidity. On average the patients had 4.7 (SD: 1.9) chronic conditions corresponding to the predefined list of morbidities. By modelling implications of guideline adherence for a patient with an average number of co-morbidities, we found that 10-11 annual consultations with the general practitioner were needed for the follow-up of the stable state of the chronic conditions. More consultations were needed for patients with more complex multimorbidity. CONCLUSIONS:Multimorbidity had a clear impact on the basis for the follow-up of patients with stroke in general practice. Adhering to the guidelines for each condition is challenging, even for patients with few co-morbidities. For patients with complex multimorbidity, adhering to the guidelines is obviously unmanageable.

Project description:BackgroundThe 20% observed mortality within 5 years among survivors of myocardial infarction may be explained in part by non-adherence to the recommended treatment over the long term.Main objectiveTo investigate post-myocardial infarction patients' adherence to the therapeutic, lifestyle and risk factor control recommendations of the French health authority over 6 years.Materials and methodsA cohort of survivors of myocardial infarction established in Tours in 2009 was followed over 6 years. The general practitioner of the patients included in the first 1-year follow-up study was contacted to collect data on treatments, cardiovascular risk factors and lifestyle between January and June 2015. Data were described and compared with the recommendations and predictors of achieving all the recommended targets were determined.ResultsA total of 97 patients (52%) among the 185 patients who underwent a coronary angioplasty for MI were included at baseline. Treatment was adapted by the general practitioner on the advice on the cardiologist for 75% (73/97) patients, by both of them for 12% (12/97) and by the general practitioner alone for 7% (7/97) patients. Among the 97 initial patients, 62 were included in the final analysis at 6 years. Fatal events rate was 5% (5/97) at 1 year and 12% (11/91) at 6 years. Non-fatal events rate was 44% (43/97) at 6 months, 19% (17/91) at 1 year and 29% (18/62) at 6 years. Six years after the myocardial infarction, 6 (10%) patients achieved the recommended targets in terms of prescriptions of treatment, risk factors and lifestyle targets. Exposure to a cardiac rehabilitation program after a myocardial infarction was associated with long-term achievement of optimal therapeutic objectives (OR = 7.31 [95% CI 1.74; 44.88], p<0.002).ConclusionOur data show suboptimal long-term adherence to secondary prevention treatment in this high-risk population of survivors of myocardial infarction, which seems to be improved in patients exposed to a cardiac rehabilitation program.

Dataset Information

Clinical follow-up practices after cervical cancer screening by co-testing: A population-based study of adherence to U.S. guideline recommendations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets