Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: Despite programmed screening in the Netherlands, the decrease in incidence of cervical carcinoma lags behind. We analysed screening results preceding carcinoma cases, timeliness in case of follow-up, and FIGO (International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics) stages as efficiency parameters for screening were taken. METHODS: We analysed 286 women with cervical cancer between 2005 and 2007 for cytology history preceding carcinoma, hierarchically arranging cytology history (if present) into three groups: 'screened', 'work-up', and 'underscreened' (>6 yrs before diagnosis). For screen- and work-up smears, we analysed timeliness. FIGO stage was measured in relation to cytology history. RESULTS: A total of 105 out of 286 (36.7%) women with cervical carcinoma were screened preceding the diagnosis. Delayed time intervals in case of abnormal cytology were 43.5% for borderline/mild dyskaryosis (BMD) and 38.0% for BMD (moderate dyskaryosis or worse; P=0.51). A total of 108 out of 286 (36.4%) women were underscreened, and 73 out of 286 (25.5%) were unscreened. Advanced carcinoma or FIGO stage ≥2B in screened women was 16.0 vs 48.7% in work-up, underscreened, or unscreened (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Women with cervical cancer are underscreened and have poor timeliness in case of abnormal cytology. Being un- or underscreened correlates significantly with higher cervical cancer stages, especially in older women (aged ≥49 years; P<0.001). Improvement of attendancy is needed to meet the standard of quality for screening programmes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gök et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: