medigraphic.com
Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán

2006, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Rev Invest Clin 2006; 58 (3)

Medical care abandon factors in precursor lesions of cervical cancer

Hernández-Alemán FR, Ornelas-Bernal LA, Apresa-García T, Sánchez-Garduño S, Martínez-Rodríguez OA, Hernández-Hernández DM

Language: Spanish
References: 36
Page: 217-227
PDF size: 91.68 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective. To determine factors associated with medical care abandon of women with CIN. Material and methods. A nested case-control study in a cohort was done. Patients referred to clinical Dysplasia of Gyneco Obstetrician Services in third level Hospitals were considered. Cases: Patients who abandoned medical care. Controls: women who attend their medical appointments during follow-up. All subjects underwent structured interviews focused on social, clinical and health services factors in two different times, applied at the beginning of study and the end of follow-up. Clinical records were reviewed to obtain clinical information. Analysis: Descriptive and inferential statistical was done. Non conditional Logistic Regression analysis was done to obtain adjusted association. Results. Abandon cumulative incidence rate was 108/525 = 20.7% (I.C. 95% = 17.2-24.3); 60.2% happened in diagnosis phase, 17.7% ocured during therapeutic phase and 23.1% happened in surveillance phase. We studied 108 cases and 417 controls to analysis. Next adjusted risk factors were obtained: Afraid to death (ORa = 4.2, I.C.95% = 1.8-9.5), long appointments (ORa = 6.6, I.C.95% = 3.4-13.0), lack of privacity (ORa = 12.5, I.C.95% = 2.6-59.8), reject to treatment (ORa = 40.4, I.C.95% = 2.1-785.4), lack of information (ORa = 41.9, I.C.95% =14.2-124.1) and other factors. Conclusions. Patient perception, access and barriers in health services were the most important factors associated with medical care abandon.


REFERENCES

  1. Registro Histopatológico de Neoplasias en México. Secretaría de Salud. Dirección General de Epidemiología e Informática. 2001.

  2. Kiviat N. Natural history of cervical neoplasia: Overview and update. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 175: 1099-104.

  3. van Oortmarssen GJ, Habbema JD. Epidemiological evidence for age-dependent regression of pre-invasive cervical cancer. Br J Cancer 1991; 64: 559-65.

  4. Boone CW, Kellof GJ, Steele VE. Natural history of intraepithelial neoplasia in humans with implications for cancer chemoprevention strategy. Cancer Res 1992; 52: 1651-9.

  5. Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS, Twiggs LB, Wilkinson EJ. 2001 Consensus Guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA 2002; 287: 2120-9.

  6. Cullen J, Schwartz MD, Lawrence WF, Selby JV, Mandelblatt JS. Short-Term Impact of Cancer Prevention and Screening Activities on Quality of Life. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 943-52.

  7. McDonald TW, Neutens JJ, Fischer LM, Jessee D. Impact of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia diagnosis and treatment of selfesteem and body image. Gynecol Oncol 1989; 34: 345-9.

  8. Eger RR, Peipert JF. Risk factor for noncompliance in a colposcopy clinic. J Reprod Med 1996; 41: 671-4.

  9. Schofield MJ, Sanson-Fisher R, Halpin S, Redman S. Notification and follow-up Pap of test results: current practice and women’s preferences. Prev Med 1994; 23: 276-83.

  10. Padilla-Paz LA, Carlson JDO, Twiggs LB, Lonky N, Crum CP, Felix J, et al. Evidence supporting the current management guidelines for High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Cytology. J Lower Genital Tract Dis 2004; 8: 139-46.

  11. Cirisano FD. Management of pre-invasive disease of the cervix. Semin Surg Oncol 1999; 16: 222-7.

  12. Nuovo J, Melnikow J, Willan AR, Chan BK. Treatment outcomes for squamous intraepithelial lesions. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2000; 68: 25-33.

  13. Skinner EN, Gehrig PA, Van Le L. High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions: Abbreviating Postreatment Surveillance. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 103: 488-92.

  14. Hagen B, Skjeldestad FE, Bratt H, Tingulstad S, Lie AK. C02 Laser ionization for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II-III: complications and efficacy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1998; 77: 558-63.

  15. Reich O, Pickel H, Lahousen M, Tamussino K, Winter R. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia III: long-term outcome after cold-knife ionization with clear margins. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 97: 428-30.

  16. Keijser KG, Kenemans P, van der Zanden PH, Schijf C, Vooijs GP, Rolland R. Diathermy loop excision in the management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: diagnosis and treatment in one procedure. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 166: pp. 1281-7.

  17. Marcus AC, Kaplan CP, Crane LA, Berek JS, Bernstein J, Gunning JE, et al. Reducing loss-to-follow-up among women with abnormal Pap smear. Result from a randomized trial testing and intensive follow-up protocol and economic incentives. Med Care 1998; 36: 397-410.

  18. Rosenstock IM, Strecher VJ, Becker MH. Social learning theory and the health belief model. Health Educ Q 1988; 15: 175-83.

  19. Austin LT, Ahmad F, McNally MJ, Stewart DE. Breast and cervical cancer screening in Hispanic women: A literature review using the health belief model. Womens Health Issues 2002; 12: 122-8.

  20. Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-014-SSA2-1998. Para la prevención, detección, tratamiento, control y vigilancia epidemiológica del cáncer cérvico uterino. 1998.

  21. Rothman K, Greenland S. Case-Control studies. In: Rothman K, Greenland S. Modern Epidemiology. 2nd edition. Philadelphia: Lippincot-Raven; 1998, 93-100.

  22. SPSS, v 12. Statistical Package for Social Sciences. 2005.

  23. Lockwood-Rayermann S. Characteristics of participation in cervical cancer screening. Cancer Nurs 2004; 27: 353-63.

  24. Fiscella K, Franks P, Gold MR, Clancy CM. Inequality in quality: addressing socioeconomic, racial, and ethnic disparities in health Care. JAMA 2000; 283: 2579-84.

  25. Olvera Rodriguez A, Quiroz Perez Q, Pérez Lopez JC, Morales VR. Displasia cervical y carcinoma cérvico uterino: Un reto para los servicios de salud. Ginecol Obstet Mex 1998; 66: 232-6.

  26. Miller SM, Siejak KK, Schroeder CM, Lerman C, Hernandez E, Helm CW. Enhancing adherence following abnormal PAP smear among low-income minority women: a preventive telephone counseling strategy. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997; 21: 703-8.

  27. Sardell AN, Trierweiler SJ. Disclosing the cancer diagnosis. Procedure that patients hopefulness. Cancer 1993; 72: 3355-65.

  28. Lee J, Seow A, Ling SL, Peng LH. Improving adherence to regular pap smear screening among Asian women: a population-based study in Singapore. Health Educ Behav 2002; 29: 207-18.

  29. Olsen MM. Family participation in posthospital care: women’s work. J Psychosoc Oncol 1989; 7: 77-93.

  30. Merrill JM. Access to high-tech health care. Ethics. Cancer 1991; 67: 1750-52.

  31. Shetter AG. The fundamentals of patient assessment: the importance of the examination and the patient relationship. Clin Neurosurg 2004; 51: 26-9.

  32. Petkova V. The role of information for improvement of patients’ treatment in Bulgaria. Cent Eur J Public Health 2004; 12: 69-74.

  33. Coyle N, Sculco L. Communication and the patient/physician relationship: a phenomenological inquiry. J Support Oncol 2003; 1: 206-15.

  34. Massad LS, Meyer P, Hobbs J. Knowledge of cervical cancer screening among women attending urban colposcopy clinics. Cancer Detect Prev 1997; 21: 103-9.

  35. Seffrin JR, Wilson JL, Bruce L, Black BL. Patient perceptions. Cancer 1991; 67(s): 1783-7.

  36. Nelson K, Geiger AM, Mangione CM. Effect of health beliefs on delays in care for abnormal cervical cytology in a multiethnic population. J Gen Intern Med 2002; 17: 709-16.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com