Sociodemographic gradients in breast and cervical cancer screening in Korea: the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey (KNCSS) 2005-2009

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Cancer screening rates in Korea for five cancer types have increased steadily since 2002. With regard to the life-time cancer screening rates in 2009 according to cancer sites, the second highest was breast cancer (78.1%) and the third highest was cervical cancer (76.1%). Despite overall increases in the screening rate, disparities in breast and cervical cancer screening, based on sociodemographic characteristics, still exist.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data from 4,139 women aged 40 to74 years from the 2005 to 2009 Korea National Cancer Screening Survey were used to analyze the relationship between sociodemographic characteristics and receiving mammograms and Pap smears. The main outcome measures were ever having had a mammogram and ever having had a Pap smear. Using these items of information, we classified women into those who had had both types of screening, only one screening type, and neither screening type. We used logistic regression to investigate relationships between screening history and sociodemographic characteristics of the women.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Being married, having a higher education, a rural residence, and private health insurance were significantly associated with higher rates of breast and cervical cancer screening after adjusting for age and sociodemographic factors. Household income was not significantly associated with mammograms or Pap smears after adjusting for age and sociodemographic factors.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Disparities in breast and cervical cancer screening associated with low sociodemographic status persist in Korea.</p

Design and methods for a randomized clinical trial comparing three outreach efforts to improve screening mammography adherence

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite the demonstrated need to increase screening mammography utilization and strong evidence that mail and telephone outreach to women can increase screening, most managed care organizations have not adopted comprehensive outreach programs. The uncertainty about optimum strategies and cost effectiveness have retarded widespread acceptance. While 70% of women report getting a mammogram within the prior 2 years, repeat mammography rates are less than 50%. This 5-year study is conducted though a Central Massachusetts healthcare plan and affiliated clinic. All womenhave adequate health insurance to cover the test.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>This randomized study compares 3 arms: reminder letter alone; reminder letter plus reminder call; reminder letter plus a second reminder and booklet plus a counselor call. All calls provide women with the opportunity to schedule a mammogram in a reasonable time. The invention period will span 4 years and include repeat attempts. The counselor arm is designed to educate, motivate and counsel women in an effort to alleviate PCP burden.</p> <p>All women who have been in the healthcare plan for 24 months and who have a current primary care provider (PCP) and who are aged 51-84 are randomized to 1 of 3 arms. Interventions are limited to women who become ≥18 months from a prior mammogram. Women and their physicians may opt out of the intervention study.</p> <p>Measurement of completed mammograms will use plan billing records and clinic electronic records. The primary outcome is the proportion of women continuously enrolled for ≥24 months who have had ≥1 mammogram in the last 24 months. Secondary outcomes include the number of women who need repeat interventions. The cost effectiveness analysis will measure all costs from the provider perspective.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>So far, 18,509 women aged 51-84 have been enrolled into our tracking database and were randomized into one of three arms. At baseline, 5,223 women were eligible for an intervention. We anticipate that the outcome will provide firm data about the maximal effectiveness as well as the cost effectiveness of the interventions both for increasing the mammography rate and the repeat mammography rate.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p><url>http://clinicaltrials.gov/</url><a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01332032">NCT01332032</a></p

Validation of ICD-9 Codes for Stable Miscarriage in the Emergency Department

INTRODUCTION: International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) diagnosis codes have not been validated for identifying cases of missed abortion where a pregnancy is no longer viable but the cervical os remains closed. Our goal was to assess whether ICD-9 code “632” for missed abortion has high sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) in identifying patients in the emergency department (ED) with cases of stable early pregnancy failure (EPF). METHODS: We studied females ages 13–50 years presenting to the ED of an urban academic medical center. We approached our analysis from two perspectives, evaluating both the sensitivity and PPV of ICD-9 code “632” in identifying patients with stable EPF. All patients with chief complaints “pregnant and bleeding” or “pregnant and cramping” over a 12-month period were identified. We randomly reviewed two months of patient visits and calculated the sensitivity of ICD-9 code “632” for true cases of stable miscarriage. To establish the PPV of ICD-9 code “632” for capturing missed abortions, we identified patients whose visits from the same time period were assigned ICD-9 code “632,” and identified those with actual cases of stable EPF. RESULTS: We reviewed 310 patient records (17.6% of 1,762 sampled). Thirteen of 31 patient records assigned ICD-9 code for missed abortion correctly identified cases of stable EPF (sensitivity=41.9%), and 140 of the 142 patients without EPF were not assigned the ICD-9 code “632”(specificity=98.6%). Of the 52 eligible patients identified by ICD-9 code “632,” 39 cases met the criteria for stable EPF (PPV=75.0%). CONCLUSION: ICD-9 code “632” has low sensitivity for identifying stable EPF, but its high specificity and moderately high PPV are valuable for studying cases of stable EPF in epidemiologic studies using administrative data

Validation of ICD-9 Codes for Stable Miscarriage in the Emergency Department

Introduction: International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) diagnosis codes have not been validated for identifying cases of missed abortion where a pregnancy is no longer viable but the cervical os remains closed. Our goal was to assess whether ICD-9 code “632” for missed abortion has high sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) in identifying patients in the emergency department (ED) with cases of stable early pregnancy failure (EPF).Methods: We studied females ages 13-50 years presenting to the ED of an urban academic medical center. We approached our analysis from two perspectives, evaluating both the sensitivity and PPV of ICD-9 code “632” in identifying patients with stable EPF. All patients with chief complaints “pregnant and bleeding” or “pregnant and cramping” over a 12-month period were identified. We randomly reviewed two months of patient visits and calculated the sensitivity of ICD-9 code “632” for true cases of stable miscarriage. To establish the PPV of ICD-9 code “632” for capturing missed abortions, we identified patients whose visits from the same time period were assigned ICD-9 code “632,” and identified those with actual cases of stable EPF. Results: We reviewed 310 patient records (17.6% of 1,762 sampled). Thirteen of 31 patient records assigned ICD-9 code for missed abortion correctly identified cases of stable EPF (sensitivity=41.9%), and 140 of the 142 patients without EPF were not assigned the ICD-9 code “632”(specificity=98.6%). Of the 52 eligible patients identified by ICD-9 code “632,” 39 cases met the criteria for stable EPF (PPV=75.0%).Conclusion: ICD-9 code “632” has low sensitivity for identifying stable EPF, but its high specificity and moderately high PPV are valuable for studying cases of stable EPF in epidemiologic studies using administrative data