Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 3/2015

01-03-2015 | Gynecologic Oncology

Cervical cancer screening in Germany: group-specific participation rates in the state of Niedersachsen (Lower Saxony). A study with health insurance data

Authors: Siegfried Geyer, Jelena Jaunzeme, Peter Hillemanns

Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Issue 3/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The participation rates in cervical screenings are varying over different countries. This is only partly due to the availability of organized screening programs, as the rates are also varying between countries were such programs were implemented. For Germany the level of knowledge is low, and information are outdated. In order to improve the level of knowledge, we examined whether the participation rates in cervical screenings in a large German insurance population were changing over time, and whether these changes were different with respect to age and qualification of the participating women.

Methods

The analyses were based on the complete anonymised dataset of a large statutory health insurance in Lower Saxony, Germany, with case numbers between 940,827 (2006) and 1,044,797 (2011) women aged 20 years and older.

Results

Between 2006 and 2011 the overall annual participation rates were increasing from 44.8 to 47.6 %. The highest rates occurred in women with the highest qualification level, thus leading to increasing social differences over time. There was a peak in the age group of 25–29 years from annually 60.3 (2006) to 60.2 % (2011), and bi-annually from 77 to 77.1 % with constantly decreasing rates up to the age of 60. No substantial differences occurred between a 2- and a 3-year observation period.

Conclusions

Over time only small increases of participation rates in cervical screenings occurred. These findings may be interpreted in favor of population-based screenings within an invitation program.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Spence AR, Goggin P, Franco EL (2007) Process of care failures in invasive cervical cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Prev Med 45:93–106PubMedCrossRef Spence AR, Goggin P, Franco EL (2007) Process of care failures in invasive cervical cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Prev Med 45:93–106PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Boyle P, Autier P, Bartelink H et al (2003) European Code Against Cancer and scientific justification: third version (2003). Ann Oncol 14:973–1005PubMedCrossRef Boyle P, Autier P, Bartelink H et al (2003) European Code Against Cancer and scientific justification: third version (2003). Ann Oncol 14:973–1005PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Andrae B, Kemetli L, Sparén P et al (2008) Screening-preventable cervical cancer risks: evidence from a nationwide audit in Sweden. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:622–629PubMedCrossRef Andrae B, Kemetli L, Sparén P et al (2008) Screening-preventable cervical cancer risks: evidence from a nationwide audit in Sweden. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:622–629PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Lönnberg S, Anttila A, Luostarinen T, Nieminen P (2012) Age-specific effectiveness of the finnish cervical cancer screening programme. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 21:1354–1361CrossRef Lönnberg S, Anttila A, Luostarinen T, Nieminen P (2012) Age-specific effectiveness of the finnish cervical cancer screening programme. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 21:1354–1361CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Dugué PA, Lynge E, Bjerregaard B, Rebolj M (2012) Non-participation in screening: the case of cervical cancer in Denmark. Prev Med 54:266–269PubMedCrossRef Dugué PA, Lynge E, Bjerregaard B, Rebolj M (2012) Non-participation in screening: the case of cervical cancer in Denmark. Prev Med 54:266–269PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Zucchetto A, Ronco G, Giorgi Rossi P et al (2013) Screening patterns within organized programs and survival of Italian women with invasive cervical cancer. Prev Med 57:220–226PubMedCrossRef Zucchetto A, Ronco G, Giorgi Rossi P et al (2013) Screening patterns within organized programs and survival of Italian women with invasive cervical cancer. Prev Med 57:220–226PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Grillo F, Vallée J, Chauvin P (2012) Inequalities in cervical cancer screening for women with or without a regular consulting in primary care for gynaecological health, in Paris, France. Prev Med 54:259–265PubMedCrossRef Grillo F, Vallée J, Chauvin P (2012) Inequalities in cervical cancer screening for women with or without a regular consulting in primary care for gynaecological health, in Paris, France. Prev Med 54:259–265PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Sasieni P, Castanon A, Cuzick J, Snow J (2009) Effectiveness of cervical screening with age: population based case-control study of prospectively recorded data. Br Med J 339:b2968CrossRef Sasieni P, Castanon A, Cuzick J, Snow J (2009) Effectiveness of cervical screening with age: population based case-control study of prospectively recorded data. Br Med J 339:b2968CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Arbyn M, Simoens C, Fabry V (2010) Analysis of individual health insurance data pertaining to pap smears, colposcopies, biopsies and surgery on the uterine cervix (Belgium, 2002–2006). Scientific Insitute of Public Health, Brussels Arbyn M, Simoens C, Fabry V (2010) Analysis of individual health insurance data pertaining to pap smears, colposcopies, biopsies and surgery on the uterine cervix (Belgium, 2002–2006). Scientific Insitute of Public Health, Brussels
10.
go back to reference Schneider V (2012) Gynäkologische Krebsvorsorge in Deutschland. Pathologe 33: 286–92 Schneider V (2012) Gynäkologische Krebsvorsorge in Deutschland. Pathologe 33: 286–92
11.
go back to reference Kerek-Bodden H, Altenhofen L, Brenner G, Franke A (2009) Durchführung einer versichertenbezogenen Untersuchung zur Inanspruchnahme der Früherkennung auf Zervixkarzinom in den Jahren 2002, 2003 und 2004 auf der Basis von Abrechnungsdaten. Berlin: Zentralinstitut für die kassenärztliche Versorgung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland Kerek-Bodden H, Altenhofen L, Brenner G, Franke A (2009) Durchführung einer versichertenbezogenen Untersuchung zur Inanspruchnahme der Früherkennung auf Zervixkarzinom in den Jahren 2002, 2003 und 2004 auf der Basis von Abrechnungsdaten. Berlin: Zentralinstitut für die kassenärztliche Versorgung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland
12.
go back to reference Jaunzeme J, Eberhard S, Geyer S (2013) Wie “repräsentativ” sind GKV-Daten? Demografische und soziale Unterschiede und Ähnlichkeiten zwischen einer GKV-Versichertenpopulation, der Bevölkerung Niedersachsens sowie der Bundesrepublik am Beispiel der AOK Niedersachsen. Bundesgesundheitsblatt 56: 447–54 Jaunzeme J, Eberhard S, Geyer S (2013) Wie “repräsentativ” sind GKV-Daten? Demografische und soziale Unterschiede und Ähnlichkeiten zwischen einer GKV-Versichertenpopulation, der Bevölkerung Niedersachsens sowie der Bundesrepublik am Beispiel der AOK Niedersachsen. Bundesgesundheitsblatt 56: 447–54
13.
go back to reference Corp Stata (2013) Stata statistical software: release 13. Stata Corp, College Station Corp Stata (2013) Stata statistical software: release 13. Stata Corp, College Station
14.
go back to reference Bang JY, Yadegarfar G, Soljak M, Majeed A (2012) Primary care factors associated with cervical screening coverage in England. J Public Health 34:532–538CrossRef Bang JY, Yadegarfar G, Soljak M, Majeed A (2012) Primary care factors associated with cervical screening coverage in England. J Public Health 34:532–538CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Patel A, Galaal K, Burnley C et al (2012) Cervical cancer incidence in young women: a historical and geographic controlled UK regional population study. Br J Cancer 106:1753–1759PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Patel A, Galaal K, Burnley C et al (2012) Cervical cancer incidence in young women: a historical and geographic controlled UK regional population study. Br J Cancer 106:1753–1759PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Sambamoorthi U, McAlpine DD (2003) Racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and access disparities in the use of preventive services among women. Prev Med 37:475–484PubMedCrossRef Sambamoorthi U, McAlpine DD (2003) Racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and access disparities in the use of preventive services among women. Prev Med 37:475–484PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Lavarreda SA, Brown ER, Bolduc CD (2011) Underinsurance in the United States: an interaction of costs to consumers, benefit design, and access to care. Annu Rev Public Health 32:471–482PubMedCrossRef Lavarreda SA, Brown ER, Bolduc CD (2011) Underinsurance in the United States: an interaction of costs to consumers, benefit design, and access to care. Annu Rev Public Health 32:471–482PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Ronco G, Dillner J, Elfström KM et al (2013) Efficacy of HPV-based screening for prevention of invasive cervical cancer: follow-up of four European randomised controlled trials. Lancet. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62218-7 Ronco G, Dillner J, Elfström KM et al (2013) Efficacy of HPV-based screening for prevention of invasive cervical cancer: follow-up of four European randomised controlled trials. Lancet. doi:10.​1016/​S0140-6736(13)62218-7
19.
go back to reference Arbyn M, Verdoodt F, Snijders PJF et al (2014) Accuracy of human papillomavirus testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples: a meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70570-9 Arbyn M, Verdoodt F, Snijders PJF et al (2014) Accuracy of human papillomavirus testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples: a meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. doi:10.​1016/​S1470-2045(13)70570-9
Metadata
Title
Cervical cancer screening in Germany: group-specific participation rates in the state of Niedersachsen (Lower Saxony). A study with health insurance data
Authors
Siegfried Geyer
Jelena Jaunzeme
Peter Hillemanns
Publication date
01-03-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Issue 3/2015
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-014-3421-3

Other articles of this Issue 3/2015

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 3/2015 Go to the issue