Susanne F Jørgensen, Mathilde L Nielsen, Sisse H Njor
{"title":"在机会性与非机会性宫颈筛查中坚持建议的随访:一项基于登记的丹麦队列研究。","authors":"Susanne F Jørgensen, Mathilde L Nielsen, Sisse H Njor","doi":"10.1177/14034948241289273","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Organised cervical screening programmes often allow for opportunistic screening. Previous studies have shown that adherence to follow-up protocols after cervical screening is poor. This study aims to investigate if non-adherence to recommended screening intervals - that is, opportunistic screening, is associated with adherence to follow-up after non-negative cervical screening.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using national registries we included 42,399 Danish women with a non-negative screening result from 2015 to 2017. Non-adherence was divided into insufficient and excessive follow-up. We calculated relative risks (RRs) of adherence to follow-up among different groups of opportunistically screened women, representing both too frequent and delayed screening participation, compared with non-opportunistically screened women.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with non-opportunistically screened women, opportunistically screened women who were delayed 1-3 years on their screening schedule had a higher risk of no follow-up (RR 1.99) and insufficient follow-up (RR 1.10). Women who were delayed 3-7 years on their screening also had a higher risk of no follow-up (RR 1.92). Women who attended screening up to 6 months too early had a higher risk of insufficient follow-up (RR 1.08) as well as excessive follow-up (RR 1.39). Finally, women screened more than 6 months too early had a higher risk of all deviations, but most pronounced was the risk of excessive follow-up (RR 1.67).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong><b>We found a higher risk of insufficient follow-up among women delayed in their screening schedule, and a higher risk of excessive follow-up among those with frequent screening. Screening participation behaviour seems to transfer to follow-up adherence. This underscores the important role of general practitioners in acting as gatekeepers in cervical screening follow-up</b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":49568,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Public Health","volume":" ","pages":"14034948241289273"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adherence to recommended follow-up in opportunistic versus non-opportunistic cervical screening: a registry-based cohort study from Denmark.\",\"authors\":\"Susanne F Jørgensen, Mathilde L Nielsen, Sisse H Njor\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14034948241289273\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Organised cervical screening programmes often allow for opportunistic screening. Previous studies have shown that adherence to follow-up protocols after cervical screening is poor. This study aims to investigate if non-adherence to recommended screening intervals - that is, opportunistic screening, is associated with adherence to follow-up after non-negative cervical screening.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using national registries we included 42,399 Danish women with a non-negative screening result from 2015 to 2017. Non-adherence was divided into insufficient and excessive follow-up. We calculated relative risks (RRs) of adherence to follow-up among different groups of opportunistically screened women, representing both too frequent and delayed screening participation, compared with non-opportunistically screened women.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with non-opportunistically screened women, opportunistically screened women who were delayed 1-3 years on their screening schedule had a higher risk of no follow-up (RR 1.99) and insufficient follow-up (RR 1.10). Women who were delayed 3-7 years on their screening also had a higher risk of no follow-up (RR 1.92). Women who attended screening up to 6 months too early had a higher risk of insufficient follow-up (RR 1.08) as well as excessive follow-up (RR 1.39). Finally, women screened more than 6 months too early had a higher risk of all deviations, but most pronounced was the risk of excessive follow-up (RR 1.67).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong><b>We found a higher risk of insufficient follow-up among women delayed in their screening schedule, and a higher risk of excessive follow-up among those with frequent screening. Screening participation behaviour seems to transfer to follow-up adherence. This underscores the important role of general practitioners in acting as gatekeepers in cervical screening follow-up</b>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49568,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Public Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"14034948241289273\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14034948241289273\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14034948241289273","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Adherence to recommended follow-up in opportunistic versus non-opportunistic cervical screening: a registry-based cohort study from Denmark.
Aim: Organised cervical screening programmes often allow for opportunistic screening. Previous studies have shown that adherence to follow-up protocols after cervical screening is poor. This study aims to investigate if non-adherence to recommended screening intervals - that is, opportunistic screening, is associated with adherence to follow-up after non-negative cervical screening.
Methods: Using national registries we included 42,399 Danish women with a non-negative screening result from 2015 to 2017. Non-adherence was divided into insufficient and excessive follow-up. We calculated relative risks (RRs) of adherence to follow-up among different groups of opportunistically screened women, representing both too frequent and delayed screening participation, compared with non-opportunistically screened women.
Results: Compared with non-opportunistically screened women, opportunistically screened women who were delayed 1-3 years on their screening schedule had a higher risk of no follow-up (RR 1.99) and insufficient follow-up (RR 1.10). Women who were delayed 3-7 years on their screening also had a higher risk of no follow-up (RR 1.92). Women who attended screening up to 6 months too early had a higher risk of insufficient follow-up (RR 1.08) as well as excessive follow-up (RR 1.39). Finally, women screened more than 6 months too early had a higher risk of all deviations, but most pronounced was the risk of excessive follow-up (RR 1.67).
Conclusions: We found a higher risk of insufficient follow-up among women delayed in their screening schedule, and a higher risk of excessive follow-up among those with frequent screening. Screening participation behaviour seems to transfer to follow-up adherence. This underscores the important role of general practitioners in acting as gatekeepers in cervical screening follow-up.
期刊介绍:
The Scandinavian Journal of Public Health is an international peer-reviewed journal which has a vision to: publish public health research of good quality; contribute to the conceptual and methodological development of public health; contribute to global health issues; contribute to news and overviews of public health developments and health policy developments in the Nordic countries; reflect the multidisciplinarity of public health.