Review of invasive cervical cancers and uptake of disclosure of results: an audit of procedures and response

Authors


Mr C. W. E. Redman, Academic Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospital of North Staffordshire, Newcastle Road, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, ST4 6QG, UK
Tel.: +44-01782-553460; Fax: +44-01782-553460;
E-mail: charles.redman@uhns.nhs.uk

Abstract

I. Prabakar, E. L. Moss, G. Douce, J. Parkes and C. W. E. Redman

Review of invasive cervical cancers and uptake of disclosure of results: an audit of procedures and response

Objective:  To audit the process and outcome of case reviews performed for invasive cervical cancers diagnosed between 2003 and 2007, and the timely disclosure of results to the respective patients.

Methods:  Invasive cervical cancer reviews were performed on all cases of cervical cancer diagnosed between 2003 and 2007. Following the review, women were classified into two categories: a group who developed invasive cancer despite adherence to the screening programme or in whom a management or diagnostic decision was determined to have been a principal factor in the development of their disease (Group A), and a second group who either had never undergone a cervical smear or had been established defaulters from the screening programme (Group B).

Results:  Ninety-seven of the 98 cases of invasive cervical cancer diagnosed in the 4-year study period were reviewed. Sixty of the 61 women in Group A were sent an invitation to discuss the results of their case review. Thirty-six (37%) were classified as Group B, and it was deemed neither appropriate nor possible to invite the patients for a review consultation. Of the women sent an invitation, only 24 (40%) chose to attend.

Conclusion:  A policy of selective invitation for the disclosure of invasive review results is feasible. Less than one-half of patients diagnosed with cervical cancer appear to want to know how they developed cervical cancer despite previously participating in a screening programme.

Ancillary