DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.05.019
Cervical testing beyond the screening target age - A register-based cohort study from Finland.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
It has been proposed that cervical cancer screening should be continued in women with previous abnormal results or irregular attendance. We examined the coverage and factors that might influence cervical testing beyond the age range of the organized cervical screening programme in Finland. The national programme invites women in every five years least until the age of 60. After the stopping age, only opportunistic service is available.
METHODS
Data on cervical testing were collected from the Mass Screening Registry and providers of opportunistic Pap/HPV-testing and were linked with information on socio-economic variables. The study included 373,353 women who had at least one invitation to the national screening programme between ages 50-60 years, and who were aged 65-74 years in the follow-up period 2006-2016. Multivariable binomial regression models were conducted to determine associations.
RESULTS
Altogether 33% of the study population had been tested at least once at ages 65-74 years. Previous regular screening attendance (adjRR 1.70; 95% CI 1.67-1.73) and earlier abnormal results (adjRR 2.08; 95% CI 2.04-2.12) were most clearly related to higher testing adherence at older age. Other factors related to higher testing adherence were urban area of residence, domestic mother tongue, high education level, and high socio-economic status.
CONCLUSION
Testing at older age was frequent with normal results, whereas only a small proportion of women with earlier abnormal results or irregular attendance were tested. The upper age limit of the national programme should be raised to 65 years, and the invitations thereafter should be targeted to selected high-risk groups.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.