Factors associated with willingness to perform expedited excisional treatment for patients at high risk for cervical precancer.

Rebecca B Perkins, Lindsay Fuzzell, Naomi C Brownstein, Holly B Fontenot, Alexandra Michel, Sidika Kajtezovic, Paige Lake, Susan T Vadaparampil
Author Information
  1. Rebecca B Perkins: Boston University, Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.
  2. Lindsay Fuzzell: H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Health Outcomes and Behavior, Tampa, FL, United States.
  3. Naomi C Brownstein: Medical University of South Carolina, Public Health Sciences, Charleston, South Carolina, United States.
  4. Holly B Fontenot: University of Hawaii at Manoa, School of Nursing, Honolulu, HI, United States.
  5. Alexandra Michel: Rosalind Franklin School of Nursing, North Chicago, IL, United States.
  6. Sidika Kajtezovic: Boston University, Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.
  7. Paige Lake: H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Health Outcomes and Behavior, Tampa, FL, United States.
  8. Susan T Vadaparampil: H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Health Outcomes and Behavior, Tampa, FL, United States.

Abstract

Background: The 2019 ASCCP Risk-Based Management Consensus Guidelines prefer expedited treatment, defined as proceeding to excisional treatment without first performing colposcopic biopsy, for patients with screening results indicating a high risk of cervical precancer. In this mixed methods study, we explored clinician attitudes toward expedited treatment.
Methods: In 2021, a national sample of 671 clinicians who performed colposcopy completed surveys; a subset (n���=���41) of clinicians who performed colposcopy and/or directed patient treatment completed qualitative interviews.
Results: Among 671 colposcopists, 25.7���% were currently performing expedited treatment, 50.8% were not currently using expedited treatment but were willing to adopt this change, and 23.6% were not willing to perform expedited treatment. Binomial regression analyses indicated that internal medicine and family medicine clinicians (compared to Obstetrician-Gynecologists), and those practicing in academic medal centers (compared to private practice) had higher odds of currently performing expedited treatment; internal and family medicine clinicians also reported higher odds of being willing to adopt this change. Qualitative interviews highlighted benefits including improved cancer prevention among older patients, reduced loss to follow-up, reduction of time and expense for patients, and allowing shared decision-making. Concerns expressed related to future pregnancy complications, lack of available excisional treatment services (e.g., LEEP), patient preference, avoiding over- and under-treatment, and using biopsy results to plan excisional procedures.
Conclusions: Approximately 25���% of colposcopists are currently performing expedited treatment, and an additional 50���% would be willing to adopt this practice for high-risk patients. Improving access to expedited treatment for appropriate patients could improve cervical cancer prevention.

Keywords

References

  1. N Engl J Med. 2021 Nov 11;385(20):1908-1918 [PMID: 34758259]
  2. Sex Transm Dis. 2016 Jul;43(7):438-44 [PMID: 27322046]
  3. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2009 Jan;13(1):17-27 [PMID: 19098602]
  4. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2020 Mar;13(3):329-336 [PMID: 31852663]
  5. JAMA. 1999 Oct 20;282(15):1458-65 [PMID: 10535437]
  6. Infect Agent Cancer. 2020 Oct 14;15:60 [PMID: 33072178]
  7. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Apr;196(4):407.e1-8; discussion 407.e8-9 [PMID: 17403438]
  8. Vaccine. 2009 Oct 9;27(43):6060-79 [PMID: 19647813]
  9. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2012 Mar 1;59(3):308-13 [PMID: 22134146]
  10. J Adv Nurs. 2008 Apr;62(1):107-15 [PMID: 18352969]
  11. Womens Health Issues. 2024 May-Jun;34(3):257-267 [PMID: 38383228]
  12. JAMA. 2005 Nov 2;294(17):2182-7 [PMID: 16264159]
  13. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2023 Jan 1;27(1):87-92 [PMID: 36074132]
  14. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014 Mar;124(3):204-6 [PMID: 24377647]
  15. Psychooncology. 2012 Mar;21(3):291-6 [PMID: 22383271]
  16. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2020 Apr;24(2):132-143 [PMID: 32243308]
  17. Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Jun;121(6):1209-1216 [PMID: 23812454]
  18. JAMA. 2005 Nov 2;294(17):2173-81 [PMID: 16264158]
  19. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Feb;226(2):228.e1-228.e9 [PMID: 34547295]
  20. J Gen Intern Med. 2010 Nov;25(11):1198-204 [PMID: 20652647]
  21. Womens Health Issues. 2024 Sep-Oct;34(5):506-517 [PMID: 38960815]
  22. Prev Med. 2021 Dec;153:106770 [PMID: 34416221]
  23. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2020 Apr;24(2):102-131 [PMID: 32243307]
  24. Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Apr;121(4):829-846 [PMID: 23635684]
  25. J Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Sep;20(3):164-8 [PMID: 19809550]
  26. Elife. 2023 Sep 01;12: [PMID: 37656169]
  27. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2011 Jul;15(3):180-8 [PMID: 21436729]
  28. BMJ. 2009 Jul 28;339:b2968 [PMID: 19638651]
  29. Prev Med. 2021 Mar;144:106400 [PMID: 33388330]
  30. BJOG. 2016 Jan;123(1):59-66 [PMID: 26177672]
  31. Cancer. 2024 Jul 1;130(13):2325-2338 [PMID: 38436396]
  32. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2016 May;25(5):807-14 [PMID: 26929242]
  33. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2020 Apr;24(2):167-177 [PMID: 32243312]
  34. Br J Cancer. 2007 Mar 12;96(5):738-43 [PMID: 17311015]
  35. JMIR Cancer. 2024 Feb 22;10:e46625 [PMID: 38238256]
  36. J Med Screen. 2024 Sep;31(3):201-204 [PMID: 38504656]
  37. Cancer. 2023 Sep 1;129(17):2671-2684 [PMID: 37221653]
  38. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009 Sep;106(3):202-5 [PMID: 19477446]
  39. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2016 Jul;20(3):247-51 [PMID: 27243139]
  40. Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Aug;108(2):264-72 [PMID: 16880294]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0treatmentexpeditedpatientsexcisionalperformingclinicianscurrentlywillingresultscervicaladoptmedicinepracticepreventionbiopsyhighriskprecancer671performedcolposcopycompletedpatientinterviewscolposcopistsusingchangeperforminternalfamilycomparedhigheroddscancerBackground:2019ASCCPRisk-BasedManagementConsensusGuidelinespreferdefinedproceedingwithoutfirstcolposcopicscreeningindicatingmixedmethodsstudyexploredclinicianattitudestowardMethods:2021nationalsamplesurveyssubsetn���=���41and/ordirectedqualitativeResults:Among257���%508%236%BinomialregressionanalysesindicatedObstetrician-GynecologistspracticingacademicmedalcentersprivatealsoreportedQualitativehighlightedbenefitsincludingimprovedamongolderreducedlossfollow-upreductiontimeexpenseallowingshareddecision-makingConcernsexpressedrelatedfuturepregnancycomplicationslackavailableservicesegLEEPpreferenceavoidingover-under-treatmentplanproceduresConclusions:Approximately25���%additional50���%high-riskImprovingaccessappropriateimproveFactorsassociatedwillingnessAbnormalmanagementCancerClinicalguidelinesColposcopyExcisionalHumanpapillomavirus

Similar Articles

Cited By