Screening mammography: effect of national guidelines on current physician practice

The Immediate Impact of the 2009 USPSTF Screening Guideline Change on Physician Recommendation of a Screening Mammogram: Findings from a National Ambulatory and Medical Care Survey-Based Study

Regular screening is considered the most effective method to reduce the mortality and morbidity associated with breast cancer. Nevertheless, contradictory evidence about screening mammograms has led to periodic changes and considerable variations among different screening guidelines. This study is the first to examine the immediate impact of the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guideline modification on physician recommendation of mammograms. The study included visits by women aged 40 years and older without prior breast cancer from the National Ambulatory and Medical Care Survey 2008-2010. Bivariate and multiple logistic regressions were used to determine the factors associated with mammography recommendation. Approximately 29,395 visits were included and mammography was recommended during 1350 visits; 50-64-year-old women had 72% higher odds, and 65-74-year-old women had twice the odds of getting a mammogram recommendation compared with 40-49-year-old women in 2009. However, there was no difference in recommendation by age groups in 2008 and 2010. Obstetricians and gynecologists did not modify their recommendation behavior in 2009, unlike all other specialists who reduced their recommendation for 40-49-year-old women in 2009. Other characteristics associated with mammogram recommendations were certain patient comorbidities, physician specialty and primary care physician status, health maintenance organization status of the clinic, and certain visit characteristics. This study demonstrated a temporary effect of the USPSTF screening guideline change on mammogram recommendation. However, in light of conflicting recommendations by different guidelines, the physicians erred toward the more rigorous guidelines and did not permanently reduce their mammogram recommendation for women aged 40-49 years.

Are U.S. cancer screening test patterns consistent with guideline recommendations with respect to the age of screening initiation?

BACKGROUND

U.S. cancer screening guidelines communicate important information regarding the ages for which screening tests are appropriate. Little attention has been given to whether breast, colorectal and prostate cancer screening test use is responsive to guideline age information regarding the age of screening initiation.

METHODS

The 2006 Behavioral Risk Factor Social Survey and the 2003 National Health Interview Surveys were used to compute breast, colorectal and prostate cancer screening test rates by single year of age. Graphical and logistic regression analyses were used to compare screening rates for individuals close to and on either side of the guideline recommended screening initiation ages.

RESULTS

We identified large discrete shifts in the use of screening tests precisely at the ages where guidelines recommend that screening begin. Mammography screening in the last year increased from 22% [95% CI = 20, 25] at age 39 to 36% [95% CI = 33, 39] at age 40 and 47% [95% CI = 44, 51] at age 41. Adherence to the colorectal cancer screening guidelines within the last year increased from 18% [95% CI = 15, 22] at age 49 to 19% [95% CI = 15, 23] at age 50 and 34% [95% CI = 28, 39] at age 51. Prostate specific antigen screening in the last year increased from 28% [95% CI = 25, 31] at age 49 to 33% [95% CI = 29, 36] and 42% [95% CI = 38, 46] at ages 50 and 51. These results are robust to multivariate analyses that adjust for age, sex, income, education, marital status and health insurance status.

CONCLUSION

The results from this study suggest that cancer screening test utilization is consistent with guideline age information regarding the age of screening initiation. Screening test and adherence rates increased by approximately 100% at the breast and colorectal cancer guideline recommended ages compared to only a 50% increase in the screening test rate for prostate cancer screening. Since information regarding the age of cancer screening initiation varies across countries, results from this study also potentially have implications for cross-country comparisons of cancer incidence and survival statistics.

Mammography screening of women in their 40s: impact of changes in screening guidelines

BACKGROUND

: In March 1997, the American Cancer Society (ACS) updated its recommended mammography screening interval for women ages 40-49 years from once every 1 to 2 years to once every year. At the same time, the National Cancer Institute (NCI), which had previously not recommended routine screening of women in their 40s, began recommending screening at 1 to 2-year intervals. These events occurred during the data collection phase of a prospective study of mammography screening and, thereby, provided an unexpected opportunity to examine the potential influences of changing guidelines on women's beliefs about how frequently they should obtain screening exams.

METHODS

: This analysis included 1451 African American and white women ages 40-79 years, who obtained an "index" screening exam between October 1996 and January 1998. In baseline and 2-year follow-up telephone interviews, respondents provided information on demographic, socioeconomic, health history, medical care, behavioral and psychosocial factors, and on how frequently they believed women of their age should obtain screening mammograms.

RESULTS

: After the ACS and NCI announcements of new screening guidelines for women in their 40s, a significant increase in endorsement of annual screening among women ages 40-49 years was observed, consistent with the ACS recommendation for annual screening in that age group. No increase in endorsement of annual screening among women ages 50 years and older was evident during the same time period.

CONCLUSIONS

: Women's beliefs about how frequently they should obtain mammography screenings appear to change in response to changes in recommendations of high-profile health organizations, particularly when those recommendations call for an increase in screening.

Guideline attribute and implementation preferences among physicians in multiple health systems

OBJECTIVES

Although practice guidelines are effective in assisting providers with clinical decision making, ineffective implementation strategies often prevent their use in practice. This study aimed to understand physician preferences for guideline format, placement, content, evidence, and learning strategies in different clinical environments.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with 500 randomly selected physicians from 4 major US health systems who were involved in the treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction or pediatric asthma. Paired sample t tests and Tukey's method of comparisons determined the relative ranking of physicians' guideline implementation preferences.

RESULTS

Physicians preferred guidelines located on the front of the patient chart, in palm pilots, or in progress notes and presented as flow charts/flow diagrams, algorithms, or preprinted orders that contain strategies to minimize readmits/encourage self-management and immediate treatment flows. Discussions with colleagues and continuing medical education are the most effective strategies for encouraging guideline use, and randomized controlled trials remain the most persuasive medical evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Health care organizations must align guideline implementation efforts with physician preferences to encourage utilization. The results of this study reveal systematic physician preferences for guideline implementation that can be applied to clinical settings to encourage guideline use by physicians.

An Evaluation of Standardized Patients in Improving Clinical Breast Examinations for Military Women

There is a need to improve the quality of clinical breast examination (CBE) and breast cancer screening for women. The purpose of this study was to determine whether instructions from a standardized patient to military healthcare providers would increase the quality of CBE and breast cancer screening for military women. The study used a 2-group pretest and posttest experimental design with random assignment by study site. Before and after the intervention, the providers completed a 13-item survey to assess their current breast cancer screening practices and the standardized patient used an investigator-developed checklist to assess the providers' breast cancer screening performance. The survey of breast cancer screening practice scores and the interview and CBE performance scores were analyzed using analysis of covariance with the pretest scores as covariates. Results showed the experimental group made significantly more improvement than did the control group in their total scores on the observational checklist of interview and CBE skills (F = 19.18, P < .001, observed power = 0.99). In conclusion, this method of continuing education was effective with military healthcare providers.

Another round in the mammography controversy

PURPOSE

The October 2001 publication of a meta-analysis questioning the scientific basis for recommending screening mammography sparked yet a new flame of controversy about this issue. We conducted a national survey in March 2002 to provide information about women's perspectives on the issues, including the evidence regarding the efficacy of mammography and, ultimately, their intentions to continue screening.

METHODS

We added 12 questions to a national telephone omnibus survey in March 2002 to assess women's reactions to the ongoing debate. Responses were collected over three waves of the twice-weekly survey to obtain data from 733 women between the ages of 40 and 69. The sample was weighted to the U.S. population for census region, age, race, ethnicity, and educational attainment.

RESULTS

Consistent with prior studies, most women were getting regular mammograms (78%) (95% confidence interval [CI] 75%-81%), >90% believed that mammography is effective in detecting breast cancer (95%) (95% CI 93%-97%) and in reducing breast cancer mortality (93%) (95% CI 91%-96%), and only about 22% (95% CI 19%-25%) said they were confused. Logistic regression analyses revealed sociodemographic differences among women who had heard about the controversy and who reported some confusion about mammograms. Women with lower levels of education, younger women, and those residing in nonmetropolitan areas were significantly less likely to be aware of the controversy. Although a majority of women said they were not confused about mammography, minority women and women with lower education levels were more likely to report being confused. There were no significant demographic differences in intentions to get future mammograms. Women who were concerned about getting breast cancer were much more likely to be planning to have future mammograms than women who were not at all concerned (odds ratio [OR] 3.63; 95% CI 2.37, 5.56). Likewise, respondents who said that they had enough information to make decisions whether to get future mammograms were much more likely to plan on getting screened than women who said they did not have enough information (OR 2.47; 95% CI 1.14, 5.40).

CONCLUSIONS

These results do not suggest that controversy leads to lower rates of adherence. They do indicate that some women lack the information needed to make informed decisions about mammography.

Breast cancer screening in the United States and Canada, 1994: socioeconomic gradients persist

OBJECTIVES

This study compared rates of annual mammography screening across socioeconomic status between the United States and Canada in 1994.

METHODS

Population-based cross-sectional surveys were used to compare the rates.

RESULTS

Screening rates were higher in the United States than in Canada for women aged 50 to 69 years (47.3% vs 38.8%; P < .01). Women with higher education and with higher incomes were more likely to receive screening in both countries, with no significant differences between countries.

CONCLUSIONS

For women aged 50 to 69 years, screening rates in Canada have substantially increased relative to those in the United States. However, disparities in screening across levels of socioeconomic status persist in both countries.