American journal of preventive medicine · 2023
Cervical Cancer Screening and Follow-Up Practices in U.S. Prisons.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Kanbergs Alexa N, Sullivan Mackenzie W, Maner Morgan, Brinkley-Rubinstein Lauren, Goodman Annekathryn, Davis Michelle, Feldman Sarah
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study is to better understand cervical cancer screening and follow-up practices in U.S. prisons.
METHODS: A 29-question survey examining cervical cancer screening practices, education, and facility/patient characteristics was disseminated to state-prison medical directors.
RESULTS: A total of 70% (35/50) of state medical directors completed the survey between August 2021 and January 2022. All prison systems provided cervical cancer screening both at intake and specified intervals. A total of 36% provided colposcopy on site, and 9% performed excisional procedures on site. A total of 11 states identified 1‒5 cases of cervical cancer within the last year. Frequently cited challenges included a perceived lack of patient interest, delays in community referral, and lack of follow-up of abnormal results after release.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found relatively high rates of screening with a perceived lack of patient interest as the most reported barrier. Follow-up care was also often affected by reported lack of patient interest, delays in community referral for diagnostic procedures, and patient release before follow-up. There is room for further optimization of screening and surveillance among incarcerated women by understanding and addressing systems-based challenges. By understanding patient barriers to primary screening, expanding access to onsite testing and community referral for abnormal results, and streamlining post-release follow-up, disparities in care among incarcerated women can be reduced.
METHODS: A 29-question survey examining cervical cancer screening practices, education, and facility/patient characteristics was disseminated to state-prison medical directors.
RESULTS: A total of 70% (35/50) of state medical directors completed the survey between August 2021 and January 2022. All prison systems provided cervical cancer screening both at intake and specified intervals. A total of 36% provided colposcopy on site, and 9% performed excisional procedures on site. A total of 11 states identified 1‒5 cases of cervical cancer within the last year. Frequently cited challenges included a perceived lack of patient interest, delays in community referral, and lack of follow-up of abnormal results after release.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found relatively high rates of screening with a perceived lack of patient interest as the most reported barrier. Follow-up care was also often affected by reported lack of patient interest, delays in community referral for diagnostic procedures, and patient release before follow-up. There is room for further optimization of screening and surveillance among incarcerated women by understanding and addressing systems-based challenges. By understanding patient barriers to primary screening, expanding access to onsite testing and community referral for abnormal results, and streamlining post-release follow-up, disparities in care among incarcerated women can be reduced.