Dataset Information

Assessment of trends in cervical cancer screening rates using healthcare claims data: United States, 2003-2014.

ABSTRACT: Improved understanding of the natural history of cervical cancer has led to changes in screening recommendations, including the addition of the human papillomavirus (HPV) testing as an option in routine screening. Most studies of screening trends have used national self-reported survey data. To better understand recent trends in cervical cancer screening, including cytology (Papanicolaou, or Pap, tests) and human papillomavirus co-tests (HPV?+?Pap test), we used healthcare claims data to examine screening practices and trends. We analyzed screening among commercially-insured females ages 18-65 during 2005-2014 who were continuously enrolled during three or more contiguous calendar years, to identify those who received cervical cancer screening with a Pap test or co-test. We examined screening prevalence by age group and year. During the latter years of our study period, screening prevalence (regardless of screening method) declined significantly for women in all age groups examined. Despite declines in overall screening, the prevalence of co-testing increased in all age groups except those aged 18-20. In 2014, women aged 30-39 had the highest overall screening uptake (77.5%) and the highest use of co-testing (44.4%); this group also had the lowest overall declines in screening over the time period (-4.5%). These screening measures from healthcare claims were lower than self-reported screening from national surveys of the general population. More research to explore the reasons for these differences is needed to ensure that women are receiving appropriate screening, and to better understand why screening prevalence is declining among this population of commercially insured women.

SUBMITTER: Watson M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5840841 | biostudies-other | 2018 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessment of trends in cervical cancer screening rates using healthcare claims data: United States, 2003-2014.

Watson Meg M Benard Vicki V Flagg Elaine W EW

Preventive medicine reports 20180202

Improved understanding of the natural history of cervical cancer has led to changes in screening recommendations, including the addition of the human papillomavirus (HPV) testing as an option in routine screening. Most studies of screening trends have used national self-reported survey data. To better understand recent trends in cervical cancer screening, including cytology (Papanicolaou, or Pap, tests) and human papillomavirus co-tests (HPV + Pap test), we used healthcare claims data to examine ...[more]

PMID: 29527465

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceWhile cervical cancer screening with cytologic and human papillomavirus (HPV) testing has reduced mortality from cervical cancer, overuse of these tests is associated with downstream psychological and medical consequences, as well as significant costs. Guidelines now recommend less frequent testing, although adherence to these recommendations is uncertain.ObjectiveTo determine the frequency of overuse of cervical cancer screening tests.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study included 2 299 177 women aged 30 to 65 years recorded in the MarketScan database who underwent cervical cancer screening with cervical cytologic testing, cotesting, or primary HPV testing in 2013 through 2014. Women were followed-up for 3 years, and use of repeat testing during this period was noted. Clinical and demographic characteristics associated with overuse of screening and the association between screening and performance of routine gynecologic examinations were recorded. Data were analyzed from June 15 to September 15, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresCumulative performance of overuse of cervical cancer screening with repeat cytologic or HPV testing within 36 months of the index screening test.ResultsA total of 2 299 177 women with a median (interquartile range) age of 47 (39-54) years were identified. Initial cervical cancer screening consisted of cytologic testing alone in 1 286 179 women (55.9%), cotesting in 991 583 women (43.1%) and HPV testing in 21 415 women (0.9%). The cumulative incidence of repeat cervical cancer screening was 17.7% (95% CI, 17.6%-17.7%) at 12 months, 51.1% (95% CI, 51.0%-51.2%) at 24 months and 65.8% (65.7%-65.8%) at 36 months. Repeat screening was less common in older women (32 198 women [60.2%] aged 60-64 years vs 194 665 women [67.8%] aged 30-39 years; P < .001), women with medical comorbidities (125 197 women [64.1%] with ≥2 comorbidities vs 423 012 women [64.7%] with no comorbidities; P < .001), women screened in 2014 (176 734 women [53.4%] in 2014 vs 555 767 women [69.4%] in 2013; P < .001), and those screened with cotesting (277 032 women [56.9%] for cotesting vs 450 438 [71.2%] for cytologic testing; P < .001). In contrast, overuse of testing was more common in the Northeastern US (143 916 women [68.1%] in the Northeast vs 81 552 women [51.6%] in the West; P < .001), in women with more frequent outpatient visits (238 510 women [71.1%] with ≥6 visits vs 279 412 [58.7%] with ≤2 visits; P < .001). Women with a sexually transmitted infection after their index testing were also more likely to undergo repeat testing (adjusted odds ratio, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.21-1.68]). Women who did not undergo repeat screening were significantly less likely to undergo a gynecological exam after the index screening test: during year 2 of follow-up, 657 749 women (96.7%) who underwent repeating screening had a gynecological examination compared with 203 566 women (26.2%) who did not undergo a gynecological examination.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that among commercially insured women with average risk, cervical cancer screening tests were frequently overused.

Dataset Information

Assessment of trends in cervical cancer screening rates using healthcare claims data: United States, 2003-2014.

Publications

Assessment of trends in cervical cancer screening rates using healthcare claims data: United States, 2003-2014.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets