Cervical cancer screening in Western Australia in 1992: progress since 1983

Genetics of early cancer detection behaviours in Australian female twins

Early detection of cervical and breast cancers is an important component of women's health strategy. Screening programmes, health professional interventions and preventive behaviours such as breast self-examination provide the means to this end. Our twin study sought to identify the relative influence of environmental and genetic factors on liability to early cancer detection behaviours, including use of cervical smear tests, mammograms, and breast examination. Additive genetic and random environmental effects models gave the best, most parsimonious fit to the data for each early cancer detection behaviour. The heritability of liability to Pap smear use was 66%, mammogram use 50%, breast examination by a doctor or nurse 38% and breast self-examination 37%. Genetic influences were behaviour-specific; there was no evidence for a common genetic influence on the four behaviours. Potential covariates investigated included age, amount of contact between co-twins, educational level and personality traits such as harm avoidance, novelty seeking, reward dependence, neuroticism, anxiety, depression, self-esteem, perceived control, interpersonal dependency and ways of coping. None were significant. The study was carried out before the implementation of national screening programmes with media campaigns to increase participation rates. Hence follow-up investigation, including data on regularity of behaviours, would be informative

Self-reported cervical screening practices and beliefs of women from urban, rural and remote regions

This survey aimed to explore women's perceptions of a number of issues relating to the availability and utilisation of cervical cancer screening services in the rural, remote and urban regions of New South Wales (NSW) Australia. The survey involved urban, rural and remote regions of NSW determined by the definition of the Department of Community Services and Health. This was a cross-sectional telephone survey. Of the 339 eligible urban households, 265 (78%) completed interviews; of the 286 eligible rural households, 238 (83%) completed interviews; of the 285 eligible remote households, 230 (81%) completed interviews. Telephone contact was made with randomly selected households in each region. Women in the households were asked to complete a computer-assisted telephone interview. The survey addressed a number of issues relating to cervical screening: cervical cancer risk status; provider of Pap smear service; distance travelled to have a Pap smear; perceived barriers and facilitators to cervical screening. There was no statistically significant difference in the proportions of women from urban (74%), rural (76%), and remote (71%) regions who reported having a Pap smear in the 2 years preceding the survey. General practitioners provided the majority (more than 70%) of tests irrespective of region. Compared with women from urban areas, women from rural and remote areas were almost twice as likely to have had their last Pap smear from a male general practitioner. A greater proportion of women from remote regions had to travel for 60 minutes or more to access providers of Pap smear services. Few differences in the top three reported barriers to, and facilitators for screening were evident between regions and between those women who had and had not been adequately screened. Issues of distance, isolation and access to alternative service providers are a concern to women in rural and remote regions and should be considered by those involved in the implementation of cervical cancer screening services.

Comparison of a self-administered tampon ThinPrep test with conventional pap smears for cervical cytology

AIM

To assess a self-administered tampon specimen as an alternative method of detecting cytological abnormalities and its acceptability in comparison with a conventional Papanicolou (pap) smear.

DESIGN

Comparative observational study.

SETTING/POPULATION

Two hundred and seventeen women were recruited from the colposcopy clinic of an outer urban public teaching hospital and from sexual health clinics at suburban and major metropolitan hospital clinics.

METHODS

Participants inserted and immediately withdrew a tampon, then placed it into a vial of ThinPrep PreservCyt fluid. This was analysed by a local private pathology laboratory. Results were compared to a pap smear performed the same day or within the previous 6 months. All women with an abnormal result (tampon or pap smear) underwent a colposcopy, with or without biopsy as necessary. Participants completed a questionnaire after performing the tampon test.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Probabilities of tampon test detecting (i) a high grade abnormality (pHG), (ii) any cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) changes (pCINany), and (iii) any abnormalities (pabn) compared to the conventional pap smear and, if abnormal, compared to the biopsy taken at colposcopy. Acceptability of the tampon test and conventional pap smear were also measured.

RESULTS

Probabilities of the tampon test compared to pap smear: pabn sensitivity 33%, specificity 89%, PPV 59%, NPV 73%; pCINany sensitivity 23%, specificity 97%, PPV 71%, NPV 79%; pHG sensitivity 19%, specificity 98%, PPV 63%, NPV 89%. Acceptability for tampon test was 91.21% and for pap smear, 45.85%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the self-administered tampon ThinPrep method is a poor detector of cervical abnormalities compared to pap smear, it is highly acceptable to women. It has a relatively good negative predictive value (NPV). Our study suggests that if a more acceptable, sensitive method of cervical screening was found, which removed some of the existing barriers to conventional pap testing, screening rates for cervical cancer may improve.

A perspective from countries using organized screening programs

Cancer screening may be offered to a population opportunistically, as part of an organized program, or as some combination of the preceding two options. Organized screening is distinguished from opportunistic screening primarily on the basis of how invitations to screening are extended. In organized screening, invitations are issued from centralized population registers. In opportunistic screening, however, due to the lack of central registers, invitations to screening depend on the individual's decision or on encounters with health care providers. The current article outlines key differences between organized and opportunistic screening. In the current study, literature searches were performed using PubMed and MEDLINE. Additional data were assembled from interviews with health officials in the five countries investigated and from the authors' personal files. Opportunistic screening was found to be distinguishable from organized screening on the basis of whether screening invitations were issued from centralized population registers. Organized screening programs also assumed centralized responsibility for other key elements of screening, such as eligibility requirements, quality assurance, follow-up, and evaluation. Organized programs focused on reducing mortality and morbidity at the level of the population rather than at the level of the individual. Thus, programs did not necessarily offer the most sensitive screening test for a particular cancer, and tests sometimes were offered at suboptimal intervals with respect to individual-level protection. Nonetheless, organized systems paid greater attention to the quality of screening, as measured by factors such as cancer detection rates, tumor characteristics, and false-positive biopsy rates. As a result, participants in organized screening programs received greater protection from the harmful effects associated with screening. In addition, organized programs worked more systematically toward providing value for money in an inevitably resource-limited environment. Although organized and opportunistic models of screening can yield similar uptake rates, organized programs exhibited greater potential ability to reduce cancer incidence and mortality, because of the higher levels of population coverage and centralized commitment to quality and monitoring; were more likely to be cost-effective; and offered greater protection against the harmful effects associated with poor quality or overly frequent screening.

Sociodemographic predictors of pap test receipt, currency and knowledge among Australian women

BACKGROUND

Knowledge of sociodemographic variations in cervical cancer screening can help identify population groups at risk of underutilization of cervical cancer procedures and practices. The aim of this research was to examine sociodemographic predictors of receipt, currency (being up-to-date for), and knowledge of Pap test.

METHODS

We used data from the 1995 National Health Survey. A subsample of women was given self-administered questionnaires that included questions about the Pap test. The sample size was 7,572. Using multiple logistic regression, we examined the association of age, marital status, region of residence, country of birth, Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage (IRSD), and education with Pap test receipt, currency, and knowledge.

RESULTS

Women under 30 and over 49 years of age, those not presently married, those with lower levels of education, and those born in the Middle East or Asia (compared with the Australian/New Zealand-born women) were at a greater risk of not receiving and having no knowledge of Pap test.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that, as part of a comprehensive cancer screening strategy, women who are unlikely to obtain a Pap smear might benefit from targeted interventions to improve adherence to cervical cancer screening programs.

Cervical screening among immigrant Vietnamese women seen in general practice: current rates, predictors and potential recruitment strategies

OBJECTIVE

To ascertain cervical screening rates among Vietnamese women attending Vietnamese-speaking general practitioners (GPs) in Sydney, their recall of opportunistic recruitment by these GPs and their preferences for strategies to encourage screening.

METHOD

Women born in Vietnam aged 18-69 years were recruited through the waiting room of their GP and completed questionnaires in either Vietnamese or Chinese before and after their consultation.

RESULTS

Of 355 women seen during the survey period, 170 were ineligible. Of those eligible, 118 women (64% response rate) completed waiting room questionnaires. Of 86 women 'at risk', 56 (65%) reported having a cervical smear within two years or due on that day; 26 (86%) of those 30 women overdue for screening reported visiting a GP at least twice in the past six months. After adjustment for age and education, women who were more acculturated or had resided in Australia for the most years remained significantly more likely to be screened (p = 0.027 and p = 0.037 respectively). In the follow-up questionnaire, returned by 49 women (52%) who agreed to receive it, recall of opportunistic advice from the GP was low. Female GPs, free screening and more information in Vietnamese were the three most popular recruitment strategies.

CONCLUSION

Study confirms low participation rates in cervical screening by Vietnamese women using self-report. Recent immigrants and the least acculturated are least likely to be screened.

IMPLICATIONS

A community-based strategy involving Vietnamese-speaking GPs shows promise, inviting behavioural evaluation.

Impact in general practice of the policies of the organised approach to preventing cancer of the cervix

This cross-sectional survey of cancer screening in May 1996 used a national random sample of a specified group of general practitioners (GPs). The survey included items to assess the impact of the Organised Approach to the Prevention of Cervical Cancer (OAPCC). Of the 1,271 GPs who satisfied the eligibility criteria, 855 (67%) returned a completed questionnaire. Fifty-two per cent indicated they would be 'highly' likely to introduce a discussion about cervical smears to a 58-year-old woman who was in good health and had come for a non-gynaecological consultation. Female sex, RACGP affiliation, practising in a metropolitan area and awareness of the OAPCC booklet were independent predictors of an opportunistic orientation. By contrast, 91% indicated that they would be 'highly' likely to include a Pap smear in a general health checkup. Thirty-eight per cent reported that they had found the booklet about the 1991 screening policy 'very' useful, while 38% found the NHMRC guidelines for the management of women with screen detected abnormalities 'very' useful. Around one-fifth of the GPs were not aware of these documents. Overall, 19% still recommended annual or more frequent screening. GPs from NSW and Queensland were less likely to support biennial screening than GPs from other states. Overall, 26% of GPs did not indicate that they would refer a woman who had tested positive for any grade of CIN for colposcopic assessment. Female GPs were more likely to refer women with CIN for colposcopic assessment while older doctors were less likely to do so.

Cervical cancer screening in rural NSW: Health Insurance Commission data compared to self-report

There are several sources of data for estimates of community Pap test rates, including self-report, pathology laboratory records and Health Insurance Commission (HIC) data. Estimates of screening rates can vary considerably according to the sampling frame and data source. This study aimed to compare the self-reported estimates of cervical cancer screening with HIC estimates for women in rural NSW towns. Self-report of a Pap test in the past two years from 2,498 women in 19 rural towns of NSW was compared to HIC-provided Pap test rates. Self-report levels were adjusted for non-HIC providers and HIC levels included data from the Victorian Cytology Register. Self-report estimates were significantly higher than HIC estimates in 18 of the 19 towns, with discrepancies ranging from 13% to 29%. HIC-recorded providers accounted for between 65% and 100% of Pap tests per town, according to self-report. The highest Pap test rate by self-report was 70.1%, the highest by HIC was 49.2%. The lowest Pap test rate by self-report was 45.2%, the lowest by HIC was 26.1%. There was significant variation in Pap test rates between towns for adjusted self-report estimates, but not for the crude self-report estimates. Researchers should always be aware of both the possible variations according to data source and the inherent biases for whichever data source is used. An extra caution is given to consider the public/private provider profile when exploring possible geographical differences in Pap test rates.

Pap smears in general practice: a secondary analysis of the Australian Morbidity and Treatment Survey 1990 to 1991

We investigated the characteristics of Australian general practice that predict performance of Pap smears by secondary analysis of the Australian Morbidity and Treatment Survey 1990 to 1991. Chi-squared analysis identified potential associations between Pap smear rate and patient, doctor and practice variables. Significant associations were examined using logistic regression and generalised estimating equations. Participants were 495 general practitioners who collected information on 113,468 doctor-patient encounters, of which 43,211 encounters involved females aged 18 to 70 years. Pap smear encounter (2449) were identified and classified as patient-requested (62 per cent), diagnostic (5 per cent) or opportunistic (33 per cent). The large difference in the unadjusted Pap smear rates per 100 female encounters for female general practitioners (11.7) and male general practitioners (4.2) required separate analysis by sex of the general practitioner. For male general practitioners, a Pap smear was less likely: as patient age increased; for new patients; for general practitioners with less general practice experience; for general practitioners with no postgraduate qualifications; with metropolitan practice location; and if the practice had more than 25 per cent of patients with English as a second language. For female general practitioners, a Pap smear was less likely: for older known patients; as the age of the general practitioners increased; and for management of fewer problems per 100 encounters. A Pap smear was less likely to be opportunistic: as patient age increased; for general practitioners who were Australian graduates; and for general practitioners with no postgraduate qualifications. Consideration of patient, doctor, and general practice characteristics may facilitate the design of interventions to improve cervical cancer screening.

The accuracy of self-reported Pap smear utilisation

This study assessed the accuracy of self-reported Pap smear utilisation over four different time frames, examining the magnitude of errors in self-report and sociodemographic predictors of accuracy. Self-report data on women's cervical screening was collected by interview in a random household survey (Hunter Region, NSW, Australia), with pathology laboratory data collected by a search of records within laboratories. The magnitude of error in self-report was assessed by comparing it against longer intervals in pathology laboratory data. Sociodemographic predictors of accuracy were explored using chi square analyses. Low values for specificity and positive predictive value across all four time frames indicate a considerable degree of inaccuracy in women's reporting of those instances where, in truth, screening has not occurred. Of women reporting a smear within the last three years, only 61.2% were verified within pathology laboratory records. Allowing women some "leeway" in their reporting, comparing self-report to longer intervals of pathology laboratory data, did not greatly improve the accuracy of reporting, confirming that the magnitude of inaccuracy involved is of real clinical significance. Demographic variables were not related to the accuracy of self-report and, while a woman's certainty of her response was predictive, this had little impact on the measures of agreement. Self-report of Pap smear histories consistently results in over-reporting of screening. Other means of assessing the prevalence of screening may be preferable to self-report. Where self-report data is collected, techniques to improve accuracy should be employed, and care should be taken in comparing screening rates obtained by different methods.

Cost-effectiveness of interventions to promote cervical screening in general practice

A cost-effectiveness study of three different interventions to promote the uptake of screening for cervical cancer in general practice was carried out in Perth in 1991. Women eligible for a Pap smear were randomly allocated to one of four groups: one receiving letters with specific appointments to attend a screening clinic staffed by female doctors, one receiving letters informing them of the availability of the clinic and suggesting they make an appointment, one whose files were tagged to remind a doctor to offer a smear during a consultation, and a comparison control group that received opportunistic screening only. Variable and fixed costs for each group were itemised and summarised to give an average cost per smear taken. The cost and effectiveness of each intervention were then compared with those of the control group. Sensitivity analysis was performed on the major component of the costs, the doctor's time. Opportunistic screening cost $14.60 per smear and attained 16 per cent recruitment. Tagging files was the cheapest intervention ($14.75 per smear) although it was the least effective in recruiting women (20 per cent). This result held true for different scenarios of doctor's time allocated. Intervention by invitation letter with no appointment cost $45.35 per smear and attained 26 per cent recruitment, and intervention with a specific appointment cost $48.21 per smear and attained 30 per cent recruitment. Compared with the control group, the incremental cost-effectiveness for the tagged group was $15.40, for the letter-without-appointment group $97.75 and for the letter-with-appointment group $86.50.

A community-based cervical screening program in a remote Aboriginal community in the Northern Territory

We established a culturally appropriate, community-based women's health service in Yuendumu, Northern Territory, to improve women's health and to remedy the low rate of cervical screening. During the 16 months of the program 419 cervical smears were taken, increasing coverage of the women eligible from 51 to 78 per cent. Acceptance of the program was excellent, with only 2 per cent of the women approached refusing to have a smear. Over 70 per cent of the Pap smears were done by the nursing staff in the clinic; quality control was good, with 9 per cent of smears reported as having no endocervical cells. Sixty-four per cent of screened women had normal smears and 0.9 per cent showed evidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). Three women were referred for treatment of CIN, two for CIN I and one for CIN III. The program illustrates how a combination of community involvement, staff stability, teamwork, and cross cultural understanding can achieve a comprehensive and successful cervical screening service in a remote Aboriginal community.

Cervical cancer screening for hospital inpatients: report of an intervention study

A pilot study of a cervical cancer screening service was carried out at a major teaching hospital in Perth. The service, for women inpatients aged 20 to 69 years, was staffed by a women's health nurse. The effect of providing the service (service) was compared with giving a leaflet on Pap smears to eligible women (education) and with no intervention (control). Of 517 women in the service group, 184 (36 per cent) needed a Pap smear and were well enough to be offered screening; only 29 of 184 (16 per cent) refused and 132 of 184 (72 per cent) were screened. Of those screened, 29 per cent had never had a Pap smear. Information on women in the education and control groups was obtained by mailed questionnaire. Of the eligible women in the service group, 72 per cent accepted screening in hospital, but only 24 per cent of eligible women in the education group and 20 per cent in the control group reported having a Pap smear in the four months since leaving hospital. The service group showed a very large effect relative to the control group (odds ratio (OR) 17.71, 95 per cent confidence interval (CI) 10.05 to 31.22), but there was no significant difference between the education and control groups. Other significant variables in the logistic regression model were age, marital status, and sex of the woman's general practitioner. The effect of offering the service was greater for women over 50 (OR 51.51, CI 19.01 to 139.60) A hospital-based cervical screening service provides an important opportunity for screening women who are not being reached by other services.

The value of Medicare statistics in monitoring Pap smear screening. Screening versus non-screening smears: the role of the laboratory

In November 1991 separate Medicare item numbers were introduced to distinguish screening from non-screening cervical smears for the purposes of monitoring the screening programme. Referring doctors are now expected to indicate the appropriate item number on the request form accompanying the Pap smear. To test compliance with this requirement, we examined 1000 consecutive request forms for cervical smears received in August 1993. We found that 22.7% had no item number indicated and that for a further 10.4% the item number given appeared to be incorrect. As the account issued by the laboratory must show an item number the ultimate responsibility for the choice of the item number rests with the laboratory. Using the guidelines supplied by Medicare, we formulated detailed criteria to classify smears as screening or non-screening, based on the patient's past smear history and/or clinical information provided by the referring doctor. Applying these criteria to cervical smears received in this laboratory in 1993 resulted in 70% being classified as screening and 30% as non-screening smears. Analysis of the cytological predictions for these smears showed substantially higher rates for all grades of abnormalities in the non-screening smears, thus lending support to the validity of our classification system. We conclude that classifying smears into screening and non-screening categories provides valuable information for statistical and quality assurance purposes but can only be useful for monitoring purposes if the criteria for assigning smears are applied consistently by all doctors and laboratories.