Long-term adherence to follow-up after treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: Nationwide population-based study

11Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective. To measure adherence to annual follow-up among women treated for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Design. Prospective, population-based, register study. Setting. Denmark, 1996-2007. Population. All women treated for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia with conization. Methods. Treated women were routinely recommended to have follow-up with annual smears for at least 5 years. Main outcome measures. Using individually linked nationwide register data on conizations and follow-up tests (smears and biopsies), we calculated the cumulative proportion of treated women undergoing the recommended follow-up. We measured this cumulative proportion conservatively in 15-month intervals for 5 years. Results. Adherence to annual follow-up among 45 984 treated women decreased gradually. In total, 90% of these women obtained at least one smear in the first post-treatment year, but only 40% obtained the recommended tests for 5 years. Five-year adherence was substantially better outside the capital area, for example, the odds ratio for women from Jutland compared with women from the capital area was 1.70 (95% confidence interval 1.60-1.82). Conclusions. Adherence to follow-up after conization was poor in Denmark. Our findings suggest that because of this poor adherence, recommendations for long-term annual follow-up after treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia may not be highly effective. Shorter follow-up schedules using highly sensitive tests appear attractive. © 2013 Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Barken, S. S., Lynge, E., Andersen, E. S., & Rebolj, M. (2013). Long-term adherence to follow-up after treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: Nationwide population-based study. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 92(7), 852–857. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.12116

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free