Specialty differences in primary care physician reports of Papanicolaou test screening practices

A national survey, 2006 to 2007

K. Robin Yabroff, Mona Saraiya, Helen I. Meissner, David A. Haggstrom, Louise Wideroff, Gigi Yuan, Zahava Berkowitz, William W. Davis, Vicki B. Benard, Steven Scott Coughlin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

81 Citations (Scopus)

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 guidelineconsistent 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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)602-611
Number of pages10
JournalAnnals of Internal Medicine
Volume151
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 3 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Papanicolaou Test
Primary Care Physicians
Guidelines
Physicians
Family Practice
Internal Medicine
General Practice
Reminder Systems
National Cancer Institute (U.S.)
Health Services Research
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.)
Surveys and Questionnaires
Gynecology
Early Detection of Cancer
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
Self Report
Obstetrics
Cell Biology
Multivariate Analysis
Cross-Sectional Studies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Specialty differences in primary care physician reports of Papanicolaou test screening practices : A national survey, 2006 to 2007. / Yabroff, K. Robin; Saraiya, Mona; Meissner, Helen I.; Haggstrom, David A.; Wideroff, Louise; Yuan, Gigi; Berkowitz, Zahava; Davis, William W.; Benard, Vicki B.; Coughlin, Steven Scott.

In: Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 151, No. 9, 03.11.2009, p. 602-611.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Yabroff, KR, Saraiya, M, Meissner, HI, Haggstrom, DA, Wideroff, L, Yuan, G, Berkowitz, Z, Davis, WW, Benard, VB & Coughlin, SS 2009, 'Specialty differences in primary care physician reports of Papanicolaou test screening practices: A national survey, 2006 to 2007', Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 151, no. 9, pp. 602-611. https://doi.org/10.1059/0003-4819-151-9-200911030-00005
Yabroff, K. Robin ; Saraiya, Mona ; Meissner, Helen I. ; Haggstrom, David A. ; Wideroff, Louise ; Yuan, Gigi ; Berkowitz, Zahava ; Davis, William W. ; Benard, Vicki B. ; Coughlin, Steven Scott. / Specialty differences in primary care physician reports of Papanicolaou test screening practices : A national survey, 2006 to 2007. In: Annals of Internal Medicine. 2009 ; Vol. 151, No. 9. pp. 602-611.
@article{4e079604e4524bf8b2c3a60fba960874,
title = "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 guidelineconsistent 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.",
author = "Yabroff, {K. Robin} and Mona Saraiya and Meissner, {Helen I.} and Haggstrom, {David A.} and Louise Wideroff and Gigi Yuan and Zahava Berkowitz and Davis, {William W.} and Benard, {Vicki B.} and Coughlin, {Steven Scott}",
year = "2009",
month = "11",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1059/0003-4819-151-9-200911030-00005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "151",
pages = "602--611",
journal = "Annals of Internal Medicine",
issn = "0003-4819",
publisher = "American College of Physicians",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Specialty differences in primary care physician reports of Papanicolaou test screening practices

T2 - A national survey, 2006 to 2007

AU - Yabroff, K. Robin

AU - Saraiya, Mona

AU - Meissner, Helen I.

AU - Haggstrom, David A.

AU - Wideroff, Louise

AU - Yuan, Gigi

AU - Berkowitz, Zahava

AU - Davis, William W.

AU - Benard, Vicki B.

AU - Coughlin, Steven Scott

PY - 2009/11/3

Y1 - 2009/11/3

N2 - 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 guidelineconsistent 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.

AB - 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 guidelineconsistent 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70450197363&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70450197363&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1059/0003-4819-151-9-200911030-00005

DO - 10.1059/0003-4819-151-9-200911030-00005

M3 - Article

VL - 151

SP - 602

EP - 611

JO - Annals of Internal Medicine

JF - Annals of Internal Medicine

SN - 0003-4819

IS - 9

ER -