Specialty differences in primary care physician reports of papanicolaou test screening practices: a national survey, 2006 to 2007
- PMID: 19884621
- DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-9-200911030-00005
Specialty differences in primary care physician reports of papanicolaou test screening practices: a national survey, 2006 to 2007
Abstract
Background: Cervical cancer screening guidelines were substantially revised in 2002 and 2003. Little information is available about primary care physicians' current Papanicolaou (Pap) test screening practices, including initiation, frequency, and stopping.
Objective: To assess current Pap test screening practices in the United States.
Design: Cross-sectional survey.
Setting: Nationally representative sample of physicians during 2006 to 2007.
Participants: 1212 primary care physicians.
Measurements: The survey included questions about physician and practice characteristics and recommendations for Pap screening presented as clinical vignettes describing women by age and by sexual and screening histories. A composite measure-guideline-consistent recommendations-was created by using responses to vignettes in which major guidelines were uniform.
Results: Most physicians reported providing Pap tests to their eligible patients (91.0% [95% CI, 89.0% to 92.6%]). Among Pap test providers (n = 1114), screening practices, including number of tests ordered or performed, use of patient reminder systems, and cytology method used, varied by physician specialty (P < 0.001). Although most Pap test providers reported that screening guidelines were very influential in their clinical practice, few had guideline-consistent recommendations for starting and stopping Pap screening across multiple vignettes (22.3% [CI, 19.9% to 25.0%]). Guideline-consistent recommendations varied by specialty (obstetrics/gynecology, 16.4%; internal medicine, 27.5%; and family or general practice, 21.1%). Compared with obstetricians/gynecologists, internal medicine specialists and family or general practice specialists were more likely to have guideline-consistent screening recommendations (odds ratio, 1.98 [CI, 1.22 to 3.23] and 1.45 [CI, 0.99 to 2.13], respectively) in multivariate analysis.
Limitation: Physician self-report may reflect idealized rather than actual practice.
Conclusion: Primary care physicians' recommendations for Pap test screening are not consistent with screening guidelines, reflecting overuse of screening. Implementation of effective interventions that focus on potentially modifiable physician and practice factors is needed to improve screening practice.
Primary funding source: National Cancer Institute, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Comment in
-
Summaries for patients. A national survey of doctors about screening for cervical cancer.Ann Intern Med. 2009 Nov 3;151(9):I-38. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-9-200911030-00002. Ann Intern Med. 2009. PMID: 19884618 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Primary care physicians' awareness and adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines in Texas.Prev Med. 2006 Feb;42(2):140-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2005.09.010. Epub 2005 Nov 10. Prev Med. 2006. PMID: 16290022
-
Differences among primary care physicians' adherence to 2009 ACOG guidelines for cervical cancer screening.J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2014 May;23(5):397-403. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2013.4475. Epub 2013 Dec 31. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2014. PMID: 24380500
-
Cervical cancer screening with both human papillomavirus and Papanicolaou testing vs Papanicolaou testing alone: what screening intervals are physicians recommending?Arch Intern Med. 2010 Jun 14;170(11):977-85. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.134. Arch Intern Med. 2010. PMID: 20548011
-
A synthesis of evidence for cancer-specific screening interventions: A Preventive Medicine Golden Jubilee Review.Prev Med. 2023 Feb;167:107395. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2022.107395. Epub 2022 Dec 21. Prev Med. 2023. PMID: 36565859 Review.
-
Current status of practice guidelines in oncology.Oncology (Williston Park). 1995 Jul;9(7):601-5, 609 DISC 609-10, 615. Oncology (Williston Park). 1995. PMID: 8924372 Review.
Cited by
-
Association Between Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines and Preterm Delivery Among Females Aged 18 to 24 Years.JAMA Health Forum. 2023 Jul 7;4(7):e231974. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2023.1974. JAMA Health Forum. 2023. PMID: 37477927 Free PMC article.
-
Awareness and Support of Clinician- and Patient-Collected Human Papillomavirus Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening Among Primary Care Clinicians.Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle). 2022 Jan 7;3(1):10-19. doi: 10.1089/whr.2021.0074. eCollection 2022. Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle). 2022. PMID: 35136872 Free PMC article.
-
Association of clinical competence, specialty and physician country of origin with opioid prescribing for chronic pain: a cohort study.BMJ Qual Saf. 2022 May;31(5):340-352. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2021-013503. Epub 2021 Nov 1. BMJ Qual Saf. 2022. PMID: 34725228 Free PMC article.
-
National Data Analysis and Systematic Review for Human Resources for Cervical Cancer Screening in Japan.Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2021 Jun 1;22(6):1695-1702. doi: 10.31557/APJCP.2021.22.6.1695. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2021. PMID: 34181323 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Correlates of premature pap test screening, under 25 years old: analysis of data from the CONSTANCES cohort study.BMC Public Health. 2021 Mar 25;21(1):595. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10603-4. BMC Public Health. 2021. PMID: 33765986 Free PMC article.