When access to primary care is limited, low-income women of all races and ethnicities seek care in public hospital emergency departments (EDs) in which preventive services are often unavailable. This project implemented and evaluated a cervical screening program in an inner-city ED. Clinicians were asked to offer Pap smears to women undergoing diagnostic pelvic examinations. Women with abnormal results were randomized to follow-up in one of two settings. Women with normal results received an intervention promoting annual rescreening. In 12 months, 1,523 Pap smears were performed on 1,442 women; 58% were African American; 21%, Hispanic; and 7%, Asian. Among these women, more than 22 languages were spoken, and 26% did not recall having a prior Pap smear. Preliminary findings suggest that cervical cancer screening can be incorporated into routine ED care, creating an important alternative pathway to early detection for a high-risk population.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BakerDW, StevensCD, BrookRH: Regular source of ambulatory care and medical care utilization by patients presenting to a public hospital emergency department. JAMA271: 1909–1912, 1994.
2.
RaskKJ, WilliamsMV, ParkerRM, McNagnySE: Obstacles predicting lack of a regular provider and delays in seeking care for patients at an urban public hospital. JAMA271: 1931–1933, 1994.
3.
HiattRA, PasickRJ, Pérez-StableEJ, McPheeSJ, EngelstadL, LeeM, SabogalF, D'onofrioCN, StewartS: Pathways to early cancer detection in the multiethnic population of the San Francisco Bay Area. Health Educ Q23(suppl.):S10–S27, 1996.
4.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Recommendations on frequency of Pap test screening, in ACOG Committee Opinion 152. Washington, DC, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 1995.
BangKM, WhiteJE, GauseBL, LeffallLD: Evaluation of recent trends in cancer mortality and incidence among blacks. Cancer61: 1255–1261, 1988.
7.
ParkDM, LaaraE, MuirCS: Estimates of the worldwide frequency of sixteen major cancers in 1980. Int J Cancer41: 184–197, 1988.
8.
FreemanHP: Cancer in the socioeconomically disadvantaged. Cancer39(5): 266–288, 1989.
9.
MakucDM, FriedVM, KleinmanJC: National trend in the use of preventive health care by women. Am J Public Health79: 21–26, 1989.
10.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Cancer Statistics Review, 1973-1991 (NIH Pub. No. 94-2789). Bethseda, MD, 1994.
11.
HenschkeUK, LeffallLD, MasonC, ReinholdAW, SchneiderRL, WhiteJE: Alarming increase of the cancer mortality in the U.S. black population 1950-1967. Cancer31(4): 763–768, 1973.
12.
KleinmanJC, KopsteinA: Who is being screened for cervical cancer?Am J Public Health71: 73–76, 1981.
13.
Office of Surveillance and Analysis and Cancer Prevention and Control Branch: Black-white differences in cervical cancer mortality—United States, 1980-1987. MMWR39:245–248, 1990.
14.
MichielutteR, DignanM, BahnsonJ, WellsHB: The Forsyth County Cervical Cancer Prevention Project—II. Compliance with screening follow-up of abnormal cervical smears. Health Educ Res9(4): 421–432, 1994.
15.
CushnerI, ReadingA, BardzkJ, MarcusA: An Evaluation of Three Interventions Designed to Increase Adherence Among Women With Normal Pap Smears. Paper presented at the American Public Health Association, Las Vegas, NV, September1986.
MarcusA, CraneL, KaplanC, ReadingAE, SavageE, GunningJ, BersteinG, BerekJS: Improving adherence to screening follow-up among women with abnormal Pap smears: Results from a large clinic-based trial of three intervention strategies. Med Care30(3): 216–230, 1992.
18.
VernonSW, TilleyBC, NealeAV, SteinfeldtL: Ethnicity, survival, and delay in seeking treatment for symptoms of breast cancer. Cancer55: 1563–1571, 1985.
19.
FarleyTA, FlanneryJT: Late-stage diagnosis of breast cancer in women of lower socioeconomic status: Public health implications. Am J Prev Health79: 1508–1512, 1989.
20.
DoyleY: A survey of the cervical screening service in a London district, including reasons for non-attendance, ethnic responses and views on the quality of the service. Soc Sci Med32: 953–957, 1991.
21.
McWhorterWP, MayerWJ: Black/white differences in type of initial breast cancer treatment and implications for survival. Am J Public Health77: 1515–1517, 1987.
22.
NormanSA, TalbottEO, KullerLH, StolleyPD, DunnMS, BaffoneK, KlionskyB, WeinbergGB: The relationship of Papanicolaou testing and contacts with the medical care system to stage at diagnosis of cervical cancer. Arch Intern Med151: 58–64, 1991.
23.
FreemanHP, MuthBJ, KernerJF: Expanding access to cancer screening and clinical follow-up among the medically underserved. Cancer Practice3: 19–30, 1995.
24.
DoddsME, DowdSL, Mitchell-BerenM, YarbroughM, ChoiK: A breast cancer screening program in a community hospital. J Comm Health16(5): 241–249, 1991.
25.
HognessCG, EngelstadLP, LinckLM, SchorrKA: Cervical cancer screening in an urban emergency department. Ann Emerg Med21(8): 933–939, 1992.
26.
GreenLW, KreuterMW, DeedsSG, PartridgeKB: Health Education Planning: A Diagnostic Approach. Palo Alto, CA, Mayfield, 1980.
27.
ProchaskaJO, DiClementeCC: Stages of change in the modification of problem behaviors, in HersenM, EislerRM, MillerPM (eds.): Progress in Behavior Modification. Sycamore, IL, Sycamore Publishing, 1992.
28.
FrachterRG, RonesK, RothT, WebberCA, CamilienL, BoyecJG: Pap smear histories in a medical clinic: Accuracy of patients’ self-reports. NY State J Med92(10): 421–424, 1992.
29.
McKennaMT, SpeersM, MallinK, WarneckeR: Agreement between patient self-reports and medical records for Pap smear histories. Amer J Prev Med8(5): 287–291, 1992.
30.
SuarezL, GoldmanDA, WeissNS: Validity of Pap smear and mammogram self-reports in a low-income Hispanic population. Amer J Prev Med11(2): 94–98, 1995.
31.
KurmanRJ, SolomanD: The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical/Vaginal Cytologic Diagnoses: Definitions, Criteria, and Explanatory Notes for Terminology and Specimen Adequacy. New York, Springer-Verlag, 1994.
32.
KostER, SnyderRR, SchwartzLE, HankinsGDV: The “less than optimal” cytology: Importance in obstetric patients and in a routine gynecologic population. Obstetrics & Gynecology81(1): 127–130, 1993.
33.
KivlahanC, IngramE: Papanicolaou smears without endocervical cells: Are they adequate?Acta Cytol30: 258–260, 1985.
34.
MitchellH, MedleyG: Longitudinal study of women with negative cervical smears according to endocervical status. Lancet337: 265–267, 1991.
35.
KurmanRJ, HensonDE, HerbstAL, NollerKL, SchiffmanMH: Interim guidelines for management of abnormal cervical cytology. JAMA271(23): 1866–1869, 1994.
36.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Absence of Endocervical Cells on a Pap Test (ACOG Committee Opinion 153). Washington, DC, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 1995.
37.
NadelV: Emergency Departments: Unevenly Affected by Growth and Change in Patient Use (GAO/HRD Publication No. 93-94). Washington, DC, U.S. General Accounting Office, Human Resources Division, 1993.
38.
LaneDS: Compliance with referrals from a cancer-screening project. J Fam Prac17: 811–817, 1983.
39.
MichielutteR, DisekerRA, YoungLD, MayWJ: Noncompliance in screening follow-up among family planning clinic patients with cervical dysplasia. Prev Med14: 248–258, 1985.
40.
ElkindAK, HaranL, EardleyA, SpencerB: Reasons for non-attendance for computer-managed cervical screening: Pilot interview. Soc Sci Med27: 651–660, 1988.
