A longitudinal assessment of adherence to breast and cervical cancer screening recommendations among women with and without intellectual disability.

Xinling Xu, Suzanne W McDermott, Joshua R Mann, James W Hardin, Chelsea B Deroche, Dianna D Carroll, Elizabeth A Courtney-Long
Author Information
  1. Xinling Xu: University of South Carolina, Arnold School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, 915 Greene Street, Columbia, SC 29208, United States.
  2. Suzanne W McDermott: University of South Carolina, Arnold School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, 915 Greene Street, Columbia, SC 29208, United States. Electronic address: smcdermo@mailbox.sc.edu.
  3. Joshua R Mann: University of Mississippi Medical Center, Department of Preventive Medicine, 2500 North State Street, Jackson, MS 39216, United States.
  4. James W Hardin: University of South Carolina, Arnold School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, 915 Greene Street, Columbia, SC 29208, United States.
  5. Chelsea B Deroche: University of Missouri Columbia, School of Medicine, Biostatistics and Research Design Unit, Health Management and Informatics Office of Medical Research, One Hospital Drive, Columbia, MO 65212, United States.
  6. Dianna D Carroll: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Division of Human Development and Disability, Disability and Health Branch, Atlanta, GA, United States; Commissioned Corps, U.S. Public Health Service, Atlanta, GA, United States.
  7. Elizabeth A Courtney-Long: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Division of Human Development and Disability, Disability and Health Branch, Atlanta, GA, United States.

Abstract

Each year in the United States, about 4000 deaths are attributed to cervical cancer, and over 40,000 deaths are attributed to breast cancer (U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group, 2015). The purpose of this study was to identify predictors of full, partial, and no screening for breast and cervical cancer among women with and without intellectual disability (ID) who are within the age group for screening recommended by the U.S. Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF), while accounting for changes in recommendations over the study period. Women with ID and an age matched comparison group of women without ID were identified using merged South Carolina Medicaid and Medicare files from 2000 to 2010. The sample consisted of 9406 and 16,806 women for mammography screening and Papanicolaou (Pap) testing adherence, respectively. We estimated multinomial logistic regression models and determined that women with ID were significantly less likely than women without ID to be fully adherent compared to no screening with mammography recommendations (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.72), and Pap testing recommendations (AOR: 0.17, 95% CI 0.16-0.19). For the 70% of women with ID for whom we had residential information, those who lived in a group home, medical facility, or supervised community living setting were more likely to be fully adherent with both preventive services than those living alone or with family members. For both outcomes, women residing in a supervised nonmedical community living setting had the highest odds of full adherence, adjusting for other covariates.

Keywords

References

  1. Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2001 Jun;3(3):126-135 [PMID: 15014610]
  2. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2001;21(4):49-68 [PMID: 12043172]
  3. Res Dev Disabil. 2013 May;34(5):1630-41 [PMID: 23501584]
  4. Ment Retard. 2003 Oct;41(5):365-73 [PMID: 12962532]
  5. Intellect Dev Disabil. 2013 Oct;51(5):385-98 [PMID: 24303825]
  6. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2004 Feb;48(Pt 2):142-9 [PMID: 14723656]
  7. J Am Dent Assoc. 2012 Aug;143(8):838-46 [PMID: 22855898]
  8. Ment Retard. 2005 Jun;43(3):175-95 [PMID: 15882081]
  9. Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Jan;89(1):123-6 [PMID: 8990452]
  10. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2015 Sep;28(5):394-405 [PMID: 25994364]
  11. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2009 Jan-Feb;18(1):115-8 [PMID: 19072727]
  12. Arch Fam Med. 2000 May;9(5):466-72 [PMID: 10810953]
  13. Prev Med. 2003 Nov;37(5):507-12 [PMID: 14572435]
  14. Public Health Rep. 2013 Nov-Dec;128(6):519-26 [PMID: 24179263]
  15. J Am Board Fam Med. 2011 Nov-Dec;24(6):693-703 [PMID: 22086812]
  16. Am Fam Physician. 2006 Jan 1;73(1):91-100 [PMID: 16417071]
  17. Intellect Dev Disabil. 2010 Aug;48(4):271-7 [PMID: 20722477]
  18. Ann Fam Med. 2011 Mar-Apr;9(2):142-7 [PMID: 21403141]
  19. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2015 Sep;28(5):414-22 [PMID: 26256276]
  20. FP Essent. 2015 Dec;439:11-9 [PMID: 26669210]
  21. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2006;12(1):70-82 [PMID: 16435327]
  22. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2014 Sep;27(5):431-46 [PMID: 23913632]
  23. Ment Retard. 2006 Aug;44(4):249-59 [PMID: 16834462]
  24. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2002 Feb;46(Pt 2):108-19 [PMID: 11869381]
  25. Public Health Rep. 2012 Sep-Oct;127(5):475-85 [PMID: 22942465]
  26. Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2016 Mar;29(2):89-94 [PMID: 26808613]
  27. Intellect Dev Disabil. 2014 Dec;52(6):444-55 [PMID: 25409131]
  28. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2002 Oct;46(Pt 7):569-74 [PMID: 12354313]
  29. Am J Public Health. 2005 Jul;95(7):1149-55 [PMID: 15983270]
  30. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2000 Oct;44 ( Pt 5):553-61 [PMID: 11079352]
  31. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1998 Aug;7(8):681-7 [PMID: 9718220]
  32. Prev Med. 2016 Dec;93:96-105 [PMID: 27687535]
  33. J Intellect Disabil. 2014 Mar;18(1):51-60 [PMID: 24591427]
  34. J Dent Educ. 2003 Dec;67(12):1337-44 [PMID: 14733266]

Grants

  1. CC999999/Intramural CDC HHS
  2. U01 DD001007/NCBDD CDC HHS
  3. U01DD001007/ACL HHS

MeSH Term

Adult
Aged
Breast Neoplasms
Early Detection of Cancer
Female
Guideline Adherence
Healthcare Disparities
Humans
Intellectual Disability
Longitudinal Studies
Mammography
Mass Screening
Middle Aged
Papanicolaou Test
Socioeconomic Factors
South Carolina

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0womencancerIDscreeningwithoutrecommendations0cervicalbreastgroupadherencelivingdeathsattributedUSstudyfullamongintellectualdisabilityagemammographyPapanicolaouPaptestinglikelyfullyadherentodds95%supervisedcommunitysettingyearUnitedStates400040000CancerStatisticsWorkingGroup2015purposeidentifypredictorspartialwithinrecommendedPreventiveServiceTaskForceUSPSTFaccountingchangesperiodWomenmatchedcomparisonidentifiedusingmergedSouthCarolinaMedicaidMedicarefiles20002010sampleconsisted940616806respectivelyestimatedmultinomiallogisticregressionmodelsdeterminedsignificantlylesscomparedadjustedratio[AOR]:63confidenceinterval[CI]55-072AOR:17CI16-01970%residentialinformationlivedhomemedicalfacilitypreventiveservicesalonefamilymembersoutcomesresidingnonmedicalhighestadjustingcovariateslongitudinalassessmentBreastCervicalHealthcaredisparitiesIntellectualdisabilitiesMammographytest

Similar Articles

Cited By