Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 98, Issue 5, pp 374–378 | Cite as

Mammography Rates for 20 Community-based Family Practices in Ontario

A Full Practice Audit
  • J. Graham Swanson
  • Janusz Kaczorowski
Article

Abstract

Background

Many Canadian women 50 to 69 years of age do not have a mammogram within the recommended screening interval of every two years. Recent data suggest that over 50% of Canadian women did not have a time-appropriate mammogram and that not having a family physician was a significant factor associated with suboptimal screening. This study reviewed medical charts of 20 family physicians’ practices to examine their mammography screening patterns.

Methods

Medical charts of all women between 52 and 71 years of age in 20 family practices were examined for mammography reports between September 2003 and June 2004.

Results

Across the 20 practices, 3,430 charts of eligible women 52 to 71 years of age were reviewed (mean per practice = 173 women; ranging from 38 to 385). The two-year time-appropriate mammography rate was 58.8%. The screening rates ranged from 25% to 76% across 20 practices. Four practices attained a 70% or greater time-appropriate screening rate. When we extended the time-appropriate frame to 36 months, the overall mammography rate increased to 70.0%. Practice size, method of remuneration for patient care, use of an electronic medical record, gender or age of physician, practice setting, use of Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP) were not found to be significantly associated with mammography screening rates.

Interpretation

Mammography rates within the recommended two-year interval for women who have a regular family physician are suboptimal. The rates for women in this study, all of whom have a family physician, were only slightly higher than those reported elsewhere for women without one. Further studies are required to uncover and overcome barriers to optimal mammography screening rates.

MeSH terms

Mammography family practice medical audit questionnaires 

Résumé

Contexte

De nombreuses Canadiennes de 50 à 69 ans ne se soumettent pas à une mammographie tous les deux ans (l’intervalle de dépistage recommandé). Des données récentes donnent à penser que c’est le cas de plus de 50 % des Canadiennes dans le groupe d’âge visé, et que le fait de ne pas avoir de médecin de famille est un important facteur expliquant ce dépistage sous-optimal. Nous avons examiné les fiches médicales de 20 cabinets de médecine familiale pour déceler la fréquence des dépistages mammographiques effectués.

Méthode

Les rapports de mammographies dans les fiches médicales de toutes les patientes de 52 à 71 ans de 20 cabinets de médecine familiale ont été examinés pour la période de septembre 2003 à juin 2004.

Résultats

Dans les 20 cabinets, nous avons analysé 3 430 fiches de patientes admissibles âgées de 52 à 71 ans (moyenne = 173 femmes par cabinet; écart = 38 à 385). L’intervalle approprié de deux ans entre chaque mammographie était observé dans 58,8 % des cas (écart = 25 % à 76 % pour les 20 cabinets). Quatre cabinets affichaient un taux de dépistage de 70 % ou plus dans l’intervalle recommandé. Pour un intervalle de dépistage de 36 mois, le taux global de mammographie passait à 70 %. Ni la taille du cabinet, ni la méthode de rémunération, ni l’utilisation d’un dossier médical électronique, ni le sexe ou l’âge du médecin, ni le milieu de soins, ni le recours au Programme ontarien de dépistage du cancer du sein ne présentaient de corrélation significative avec les taux de dépistage mammographique.

Interprétation

Les taux de dépistage mammographique aux deux ans (l’intervalle recommandé) sont sous-optimaux chez les femmes ayant un médecin de famille. Les taux relevés pour les femmes dans cette étude, qui avaient toutes un médecin de famille, n’étaient que légèrement supérieurs aux taux déclarés ailleurs pour les femmes sans médecin de famille. D’autres études seraient nécessaires pour découvrir et supprimer les obstacles à un dépistage mammographique optimal.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    National Cancer Institute of Canada. Canadian Cancer Statistics 2000. Toronto, ON: The National Cancer Institute, 2000.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Morrison, BJ. Screening for breast cancer. In: Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. Canadian Guide to Clinical Preventive Health Care. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada, 1994;788–95.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anderson KK, Sebaldt RJ, Lohfeld L, Burgess K, Donald FC, Kaczorowski J. Views of family physicians in southwestern Ontario on preventive care services and performance incentives. Fam Pract 2006;23(4):469–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hutchison BG, Abelson J, Woodward CA, Norman G. Preventive care and barriers to effective prevention. How do family physicians see it? Can Fam Phys 1996;42:1693–700.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kasman N, Woodward G, Ardal S. Ontario Region and Public Health Unit Mammography Screening Rates: Administrative versus Survey Methods. ICES, September 2003.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Maxwell CJ, Bancej CM, Snider J. Predictors of mammography use among Canadian women aged 50–69: Findings from the 1996/97 National Population Health Survey. CMAJ 2001;164(3):329–34.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Van Harrison R, Janz NK, Wolfe RA, Tedeschi PJ, Stross JK, Huang X, McMahon Jr, LF. Characteristics of primary care physicians and their practices associated with mammography rates for older women. Cancer 2003;98:1811–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Andrews, FJ. Pain during mammography: Implications for breast screening programmes. Australasian Radiology 2001;45(2):113–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miller D, Martin I, Herbison P. Interventions for relieving the pain and discomfort of screening mammography. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 3, 2004.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Munn, EM. Nonparticipation in mammography screening: Apathy, anxiety or cost? N Z Med J 1993;106(959):284–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Friedman LC, Woodruff A, Lane M, Weinberg AD, Cooper HP, Webb, JA. Breast cancer screening behaviors and intentions among asymptomatic women 50 years of age and older. Am J Prev Med 1995;11(4):218–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gann P, Melville SK, Luckmann R. Characteristics of primary care office systems as predictors of mammography utilization. Ann Intern Med 1993;118:893–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Valanis B, Whitlock EE, Mullooly J, Vogt T, Smith S, Chen C, Glasgow, RE. Screening rarely screened women: Time-to-service and 24-month outcomes of tailored interventions. Prev Med 2003;37(5)442–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mayer JA, Lewis EC, Slymen DJ, Dullum J, Kurata H, Holbrook A, et al. Patient reminder letters to promote annual mammograms: A randomized controlled trial. Prev Med 2000;31(4):315–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Somkin CP, Hiatt RA, Hurley LB, Gruskin E, Acherson L, Larson P. The effect of patient and provider reminders on mammography and papanicolaou smear screening in a large health maintenance organization. Arch Intern Med 1997;157(15):1658–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Physician reminders and audit with feedback are effective in increasing breast cancer screening. ACP Journal Club 1995;123:25.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bonfill X, Marzo M, Pladevall M, Marti J, Emparanza, JI. Strategies for increasing the participation of women in community breast cancer screening. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 3, 2004.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    O’Connor AM, Perrault, DJ. Importance of physician’s role highlighted in survey of women’s breast screening practices. Can J Public Health 1995;86(1):42–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    National Physicians Survey 2004, College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC), Canadian Medical Association (CMA), Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPDC), 2004.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.McMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada
  2. 2.Department of Family MedicineCanada
  3. 3.Department of Clinical Epidemiology and BiostatisticsMcMaster UniversityCanada

Personalised recommendations