Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Cancer 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Organized breast screening improves reattendance compared to physician referral: a case control study

Authors: Ilia Makedonov, Sumei Gu, Lawrence F Paszat, on behalf of the investigators of the Ontario Cancer Screening Research Network

Published in: BMC Cancer | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP) is a population-based breast screening programme, not requiring physician referral. OBSP invites women by mail to book their next screens. However, women who do not participate in the OBSP, may be referred by physicians to non-OBSP mammography facilities, which do not remind women to book their next screen.

Methods

We identified women without breast cancer prior to June 30, 2011, having bilateral mammography (M) during a baseline period at age 50 – 69 at OBSP or non-OBSP facilities, and during a re-exposure period, at the same facility type. We used a case-control design to study the association of facility type and having M during an outcome period. Cases were women failing to receive the outcome M. Controls were matched by age, census tract, and socioeconomic status. Exposure was baseline facility type. Covariates were comorbidity, residential mobility, and primary care physician (PCP) characteristics. Conditional logistic regression analysis was performed.

Results

Cases were less likely to have been screened at OBSP facilities. Failure to receive the outcome M was associated with having moved after re-exposure M (OR = 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52, 1.71), having a male PCP (OR = 1.05, 95% CI 1.02, 1.05), or a higher Charlson score (OR = 1.06 per unit increase, 95% CI 1.03, 1.09). Having re-exposure M at an OBSP facility (OR = 0.18, 95% CI 0.18, 0.19)., having a Canadian trained PCP (OR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.8, 0.87), and having a PCP one year after the re-exposure M (OR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.68, 0.97) were protective against failure to receive the outcome M.

Conclusions

The OBSP, not requiring physician referral, and inviting women by mail to book their next screen, is associated with a lower probability of failure to reattend for subsequent screening than screening by PCP referral to non-OBSP facilities.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Jemal A, Bray F, Ferlay J. Global cancer statistics. CA-A Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:69–90.CrossRef Jemal A, Bray F, Ferlay J. Global cancer statistics. CA-A Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:69–90.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Humphrey L, Helfand M. Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:347–67.CrossRefPubMed Humphrey L, Helfand M. Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:347–67.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Rubin S, Sandrock C, Ernster VL. Efficacy of screening mammography: a meta analysis. JAMA. 1995;273:149–54.CrossRefPubMed Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Rubin S, Sandrock C, Ernster VL. Efficacy of screening mammography: a meta analysis. JAMA. 1995;273:149–54.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Force UPST. Screening for breast cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:716–26.CrossRef Force UPST. Screening for breast cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:716–26.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Fitzpatrick-Lewis D, Hodgson N, Ciliska D, Gorber SC, Bell N, Brauer P, et al. Breast cancer screening. 2011. Fitzpatrick-Lewis D, Hodgson N, Ciliska D, Gorber SC, Bell N, Brauer P, et al. Breast cancer screening. 2011.
7.
go back to reference Tatla R, Paszat L, Bondy S, Chen Z, Chiarelli A, Mai V. Socioeconomic status & returning for a second screen in the Ontario breast screening program. Breast. 2003;12:237–46.CrossRefPubMed Tatla R, Paszat L, Bondy S, Chen Z, Chiarelli A, Mai V. Socioeconomic status & returning for a second screen in the Ontario breast screening program. Breast. 2003;12:237–46.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Mayer J, Lewis E, Slymen D, Dullum J. Patient reminder letters to promote annual mammograms: a randomized controlled trial. Prev Med (Baltim). 2000;31:315–22.CrossRef Mayer J, Lewis E, Slymen D, Dullum J. Patient reminder letters to promote annual mammograms: a randomized controlled trial. Prev Med (Baltim). 2000;31:315–22.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Wagner T. The effectiveness of mailed patient reminders on mammography screening: a meta-analysis. Am J Prev Med. 1998;14:64–70.CrossRefPubMed Wagner T. The effectiveness of mailed patient reminders on mammography screening: a meta-analysis. Am J Prev Med. 1998;14:64–70.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Kiran T, Wilton AS, Moineddin R, Paszat L, Glazier RH. Effect of payment incentives on cancer screening in Ontario primary care. Ann Fam Med. 2014;12(4):317–23. doi: 10.1370/afm.1664.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kiran T, Wilton AS, Moineddin R, Paszat L, Glazier RH. Effect of payment incentives on cancer screening in Ontario primary care. Ann Fam Med. 2014;12(4):317–23. doi: 10.1370/afm.1664.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Lantz P, Stencil D. Breast and cervical cancer screening in a low-income managed care sample: the efficacy of physician letters and phone calls. Am J Public Health. 1995;85:834–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lantz P, Stencil D. Breast and cervical cancer screening in a low-income managed care sample: the efficacy of physician letters and phone calls. Am J Public Health. 1995;85:834–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference Yang T-C, Matthews SA, Hillemeier MM. Effect of health care system distrust on breast and cervical cancer screening in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Am J Public Health. 2011;101:1297–305.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Yang T-C, Matthews SA, Hillemeier MM. Effect of health care system distrust on breast and cervical cancer screening in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Am J Public Health. 2011;101:1297–305.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Lagerlund M, Drake I, Wirfält E, Sontrop JM, Zackrisson S. Health-related lifestyle factors and mammography screening attendance in a Swedish cohort study. Eur J cancer Prev. 2015;1:44–50.CrossRef Lagerlund M, Drake I, Wirfält E, Sontrop JM, Zackrisson S. Health-related lifestyle factors and mammography screening attendance in a Swedish cohort study. Eur J cancer Prev. 2015;1:44–50.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Mobley LR, Kuo T-MM, Clayton LJ, Evans WD. Mammography facilities are accessible, so why is utilization so low? Cancer Causes Control. 2009;20:1017–28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Mobley LR, Kuo T-MM, Clayton LJ, Evans WD. Mammography facilities are accessible, so why is utilization so low? Cancer Causes Control. 2009;20:1017–28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Martín-López R, Jiménez-García R, Lopez-de-Andres A, Hernández-Barrera V, Jiménez-Trujillo I, Gil-de-Miguel A, et al. Inequalities in uptake of breast cancer screening in Spain: analysis of a cross-sectional national survey. Public Health. 2013;127:822–7.CrossRefPubMed Martín-López R, Jiménez-García R, Lopez-de-Andres A, Hernández-Barrera V, Jiménez-Trujillo I, Gil-de-Miguel A, et al. Inequalities in uptake of breast cancer screening in Spain: analysis of a cross-sectional national survey. Public Health. 2013;127:822–7.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Esteva M, Ripoll J, Leiva A, Sánchez-Contador C, Collado F. Determinants of non attendance to mammography program in a region with high voluntary health insurance coverage. BMC Public Health. 2008;8:1–9.CrossRef Esteva M, Ripoll J, Leiva A, Sánchez-Contador C, Collado F. Determinants of non attendance to mammography program in a region with high voluntary health insurance coverage. BMC Public Health. 2008;8:1–9.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Phillips KA, Kerlikowske K, Baker LC, Chang SW, Brown ML. Factors associated with women’s adherence to mammography screening guidelines. Health Serv Res. 1998;33:29.PubMedPubMedCentral Phillips KA, Kerlikowske K, Baker LC, Chang SW, Brown ML. Factors associated with women’s adherence to mammography screening guidelines. Health Serv Res. 1998;33:29.PubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Duijm L, Guit G, Zaat J. Mammographic surveillance of asymptomatic breast cancer relatives in general practice: rate of re-attendance and GP-and patient-related barriers. Fam Pract. 1997;14:450–4.CrossRefPubMed Duijm L, Guit G, Zaat J. Mammographic surveillance of asymptomatic breast cancer relatives in general practice: rate of re-attendance and GP-and patient-related barriers. Fam Pract. 1997;14:450–4.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Lurie N, Slater J, McGovern P, Ekstrum J, Quam L, Margolis K. Preventive care for women–does the sex of the physician matter? NEJM. 1993;329:478–82.CrossRefPubMed Lurie N, Slater J, McGovern P, Ekstrum J, Quam L, Margolis K. Preventive care for women–does the sex of the physician matter? NEJM. 1993;329:478–82.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Haggerty J, Tamblyn R, Abrahamowicz M, Beaulieu MD, Kishchuk N. Screening mammography referral rates for women ages 50 to 69 years by recently-licensed family physicians: physician and practice environment correlates. Prev Med (Baltim). 1999;29:391–404.CrossRef Haggerty J, Tamblyn R, Abrahamowicz M, Beaulieu MD, Kishchuk N. Screening mammography referral rates for women ages 50 to 69 years by recently-licensed family physicians: physician and practice environment correlates. Prev Med (Baltim). 1999;29:391–404.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Franks P, Clancy C. Physician gender bias in clinical decisionmaking: screening for cancer in primary care. Med Care. 1993;31:213–8.CrossRefPubMed Franks P, Clancy C. Physician gender bias in clinical decisionmaking: screening for cancer in primary care. Med Care. 1993;31:213–8.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Bulliard J-L, De Landtsheer J-P, Levi F. Reattendance in the Swiss mammography screening pilot programme. J Med Screen. 2004;11:59–64.CrossRefPubMed Bulliard J-L, De Landtsheer J-P, Levi F. Reattendance in the Swiss mammography screening pilot programme. J Med Screen. 2004;11:59–64.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Lurie N, Margolis KL, McGovern PG, Mink PJ, Slater JS. Why do patients of female physicians have higher rates of breast and cervical cancer screening? J Gen Intern Med. 1997;12:34–43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lurie N, Margolis KL, McGovern PG, Mink PJ, Slater JS. Why do patients of female physicians have higher rates of breast and cervical cancer screening? J Gen Intern Med. 1997;12:34–43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Thind A, Feightner J, Moira S, Cathy T, Andrea B. Who delivers preventive care as recommended? Analysis of physician and practice characteristics. Can Fam Physician. 2008;54:1574.PubMedPubMedCentral Thind A, Feightner J, Moira S, Cathy T, Andrea B. Who delivers preventive care as recommended? Analysis of physician and practice characteristics. Can Fam Physician. 2008;54:1574.PubMedPubMedCentral
25.
go back to reference Sin JP, St Leger AS. Interventions to increase breast screening uptake: do they make any difference? J Med Screen. 1999;6:170–81.CrossRefPubMed Sin JP, St Leger AS. Interventions to increase breast screening uptake: do they make any difference? J Med Screen. 1999;6:170–81.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Organized breast screening improves reattendance compared to physician referral: a case control study
Authors
Ilia Makedonov
Sumei Gu
Lawrence F Paszat
on behalf of the investigators of the Ontario Cancer Screening Research Network
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Cancer / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2407
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-015-1346-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Cancer 1/2015 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine