Supplement

You have full text access to this OnlineOpen article

Improving follow-up to abnormal breast cancer screening in an urban population†

A patient navigation intervention

  1. Tracy A. Battaglia MD, MPH1,2,‡,*,
  2. Kathryn Roloff BS3,
  3. Michael A. Posner PhD4,
  4. Karen M. Freund MD, MPH1,2

Article first published online: 22 NOV 2006

DOI: 10.1002/cncr.22354

Issue

Cancer

Cancer

Supplement: Exploring Models to Eliminate Cancer Disparities Among African American and Latino Populations: Research and Community Solutions

Volume 109, Issue Supplement 2, pages 359–367, 15 January 2007

Additional Information

How to Cite

Battaglia, T. A., Roloff, K., Posner, M. A. and Freund, K. M. (2007), Improving follow-up to abnormal breast cancer screening in an urban population. Cancer, 109: 359–367. doi: 10.1002/cncr.22354

Author Information

  1. 1

    Women's Health Unit, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts

  2. 2

    Women's Health Interdisciplinary Research Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts

  3. 3

    Department of Organizational Behavior, Harvard Business School, Boston, Massachusetts

  4. 4

    Department of Mathematical Sciences, Villanova University, Villanova, Pennsylvania

  1. ‡

    Fax: (617) 638-8026

*Women's Health Unit, Section of General Internal Medicine, Evans Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Doctors Office Building, 720 Harrison Avenue, Suite 1108, Boston, MA 02118, USA

  1. †

    Presented at Exploring Models to Eliminate Cancer Disparities Among African American and Latino Populations: Research and Community Solutions, Atlanta, GA, April 21–22, 2005.

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 8 JAN 2007
  2. Article first published online: 22 NOV 2006
  3. Manuscript Accepted: 21 SEP 2006
  4. Manuscript Revised: 19 SEP 2006
  5. Manuscript Received: 30 JUN 2006

Funded by

  • Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health (BIRCWH) Faculty Scholar Award. Grant Number: K12-HD43444
  • ACS Career Development Award. Grant Number: CCCDA-03-228-01
  • Avon Foundation

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (117K)

REFERENCES

  • 1
    RiesLE, EisnerMP, KosaryCL, et al., eds. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2000. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 2003.
  • 2
    McCarthy EP, Burns RB, Coughlin SS, et al. Mammography use helps to explain differences in breast cancer stage at diagnosis between older black and white women. Ann Intern Med. 1998; 128: 729–736.
  • 3
    Jacobellis J, Cutter G. Mammography screening and difference in stage of disease by race/ethnicity. Am J Public Health. 2002; 92: 1144–1150.
  • 4
    Jones BA, Kasl SV, Curnen MG, Owens PH, Dubrow R. Can mammography screening explain the racial difference in stage at diagnosis of breast cancer? Cancer. 1995; 75: 2103–2113.
    Direct Link:
  • 5
    Jones BA, Patterson EA, Calvocoressi L. Mammography screening in African American women: Evaluating the research. Cancer. 2003; 97 ( Suppl 1): 258–272.
    Direct Link:
  • 6
    Bastani R, Yabroff KR, Myers RE, Glenn B. Interventions to improve follow-up of abnormal findings in cancer screening. Cancer. 2004; 101 ( Suppl 5): 1188–1200.
    Direct Link:
  • 7
    Jones BA, Dailey A, Calvocoressi L, Reams K, Kasl SV, Lee CH, Hsu H. Inadequate follow-up of abnormal screening mammogram: Findings from the race differences in screening mammography process study. Cancer Causes Control. 2005; 16: 809–821.
  • 8
    Caplan LS, May DS, Richardson LC. Time to diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer: Results from the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, 1991–1995. Am J Public Health. 2000; 90: 130–134.
  • 9
    Chang SW, Kerlikowske K, Napoles-Springer A, Posner SF, Sickles EA, Perez-Stable EJ. Racial differences in timeliness of follow-up after abnormal screening mammography. Cancer. 1996; 78: 1395–1402.
    Direct Link:
  • 10
    Kerlikowske K. Timeliness of follow-up after abnormal screening mammography. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1996; 40: 53–64.
  • 11
    Webber PA, Fox P, Zhang X, Pond M. An examination of differential follow-up rates in breast cancer screening. J Community Health. 1996; 21: 123–132.
  • 12
    Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Evidence report and evidence-based recommendations: Cancer prevention and treatment demonstration for ethnic and racial minorities. Bethesda, MD: United States Department of Health and Human Services; 2003.
  • 13
    Dohan D, Schrag D. Using navigators to improve care of underserved patients. Cancer. 2005; 104: 848–855.
    Direct Link:
  • 14
    Healthcare Association of New York State (HANYS). Breast health patient navigator resource kit; 2002. Available at www.hanys.org. Accessed August 15, 2005.
  • 15
    Capitman JA, Bhalotra S, Ruwe M. Cancer and Elders of Color: Opportunities for Reducing Health Disparities. Aldershot, Hampshire, England: Ashgate; 2005.
  • 16
    National Institutes of Health. Patient navigation research program; 2004. Available from http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-CA-05-019.html. Accessed August 2005.
  • 17
    Avon Foundation Breast Cancer Crusade. Available at www.avoncompany.com/women/avoncrusade/2005_BC_funding_guidelines.pdf. Accessed August 28, 2005.
  • 18
    Freeman HP, Muth BJ, Kerner JF. Expanding access to cancer screening and clinical follow-up among the medically underserved. Cancer Pract. 1995; 3: 19–30.
  • 19
    Longest BB, Young GJ. Coordination and Communication. In: ShortellSK, KaluznyAD, eds. Health Care Management: Organization Design and Behavior, 4th edn. Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers; 2000: 237–275.
  • 20
    Richards MA, Westcombe AM, Love SB, Littlejohns P, Ramirez AJ. Influence of delay on survival in patients with breast cancer: A systematic review. Lancet. 1999; 353: 1119–1126.
  • 21
    SAS Institute. SAS release 8.02. Cary, NC: SAS Institute; 1999–2001.
  • 22
    Wagner AK, Soumerai SB, Zhang F, Ross-Degnan D. Segmented regression analysis of interrupted time series studies in medication use research. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2002; 27: 299–309.
    Direct Link:
  • 23
    Benard VB, Lee NC, Piper M, Richardson L. Race-specific results of Papanicolaou testing and the rate of cervical neoplasia in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, 1991–1998 (United States). Cancer Causes Control. 2001; 12: 61–68.
  • 24
    Bennetts A, Irwig L, Oldenburg B, et al. PEAPS-Q: A questionnaire to measure the psychosocial effects of having an abnormal pap smear. Psychosocial effects of abnormal Pap smears questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995; 48: 1235–1243.
  • 25
    Brett J, Austoker J. Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: Psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting re-attendance. J Public Health Med. 2001; 23: 292–300.
  • 26
    Carey P, Gjerdingen DK. Follow-up of abnormal Papanicolaou smears among women of different races. J Fam Pract. 1993; 37: 583–587.
  • 27
    Crane LA. Social support and adherence behavior among women with abnormal Pap smears. J Cancer Educ. 1996; 11: 164–173.
  • 28
    Deane KA, Degner LF. Information needs, uncertainty, and anxiety in women who had a breast biopsy with benign outcome. Cancer Nurs. 1998; 21: 117–126.
  • 29
    Haas J, Kaplan C, McMillan A, Esserman LJ. Does timely assessment affect the anxiety associated with an abnormal mammogram result? J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2001; 10: 599–605.
  • 30
    Hunt LM, De Voogd KB, Soucy MD, Longworth JC. Exploring loss to follow-up: Abnormal Pap screening in Hispanic patients. Cancer Pract. 2002; 10: 122–129.
    Direct Link:
  • 31
    Lauver D, Rubin M. Women's concerns about abnormal Papanicolaou test results. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 1991; 20: 154–159.
    Direct Link:
  • 32
    Lauver DR, Kruse K, Baggot A. Women's uncertainties, coping, and moods regarding abnormal Papanicolaou results. J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 1999; 8: 1103–1112.
  • 33
    McCarthy BD, Yood MU, Janz NK, Boohaker EA, Ward RE, Johnson CC. Evaluation of factors potentially associated with inadequate follow-up of mammographic abnormalities. Cancer. 1996; 77: 2070–2076.
    Direct Link:
  • 34
    McKee MD, Caban A, Burton W, Mulvihill M. Women's knowledge and experience of atypical Pap results in a high risk community. Women Health. 2002; 36: 19–31.
  • 35
    Rojas M, Mandelblatt J, Cagney K, Kerner J, Freeman H. Barriers to follow-up of abnormal screening mammograms among low-income minority women.Cancer Control Center of Harlem. Ethn Health. 1996; 1: 221–228.
  • 36
    Shinn E, Basen-Engquist K, Le T, et al. Distress after an abnormal Pap smear result: Scale development and psychometric validation. Prev Med. 2004; 39: 404–412.
  • 37
    Zapka JG, Puleo E, Taplin SH, et al. Processes of care in cervical and breast cancer screening and follow-up the importance of communication. Prev Med. 2004; 39: 81–90.
  • 38
    Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chiasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2001.
  • 39
    Ward MD, Rieve JA. The role of case management in disease management. In: ToddWE, NashE, eds. Disease Management: A Systems Approach to Improving Patient Outcomes. Chicago, IL: American Hospital Publishing; 1997: 235–259.
  • 40
    Norris SL, Nichols PJ, Caspersen CJ, et al., and the Task Force on Community Preventive Services. The effectiveness of disease and case management for people with diabetes. A systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2002; 22 ( Suppl 4): 15–38.
  • 41
    Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Cancer Prevention and Treatment Demonstration for Ethnic and Racial Minorities 2005. Available at www.cms.hhs.gov/researchers/demos/CPTD/FRN12_23_04.pdf.
  • 42
    United States Senate. House Committee Report. Patient Navigator Outreach and Chronic Disease Prevention Act of 2005, 109th Congress, 1st session, 2005.
  • 43
    United States Senate. House Committee Report. Patient Navigator Outreach and Chronic Disease Prevention Act of 2003, 108th Congress, 1st session, 2003.
  • 44
    Champion V, Maraj M, Hui S, Perkins AJ, Tierney W, Menon U, Skinner CS. Comparisons of tailored interventions to increase mammography screening in nonadherent older women. Prev Med. 2003: 36; 150–158.
  • 45
    Olivotto IA, Borugian MJ, Kan L, et al. Improving the time to diagnosis after an abnormal screening mammogram. Can J Public Health. 2001; 92: 366–371.
  • 46
    Manfredi C, Lacey L, Warnecke R. Results of an intervention to improve compliance with referrals for evaluation of suspected malignancies at neighborhood public health centers. Am J Public Health. 1990; 80: 85–87.
  • 47
    Engelstad LP, Stewart SL, Nguyen BH, Bedeian KL, Rubin MM, Pasick RJ, Hiatt RA. Abnormal Pap smear follow-up in a high-risk population. Cancer Epi Bio Prev. 2001: 10; 1015–1020.
  • 48
    Ell K, Vourlekis B, Muderspach L, et al. Abnormal cervical screen follow-up among low income Latinas: Project safe. J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2002; 11: 639–651.
View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (117K)