This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Yood, M. U. Articles by Johnson, C. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Yood, M. U. Articles by Johnson, C. C.

Patterns and Characteristics of Repeat Mammography among Women 50 Years and Older¹

Josephine Ford Cancer Center, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan 48202 [M. U. Y., C. C. J.]; Center for Clinical Effectiveness, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan 48202 [M. U. Y., B. D. M., G. J.]; Department of Biostatistics and Research Epidemiology, Henry Ford Health Sciences Center, Detroit, Michigan 48202 [M. U. Y.]; and Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30341 [N. C. L.]

Whereas efforts encouraging women to obtain initial mammograms are laudable, the importance of returning for subsequent routine mammograms cannot be minimized. The purpose of this study was to measure the timing, patterns, and characteristics of repeat screening mammography over time in a defined population of health maintenance organization members for whom mammography was a fully covered benefit. We identified all women ages 50–74 years who were enrolled in a southeastern Michigan health maintenance organization, assigned to a large medical group, and received at least one screening mammogram with a normal result between January 1, 1989 and December 31, 1996. Using administrative and radiology data, we calculated the proportion of women who received a subsequent mammogram within 2 years and the time to subsequent screening, both overall and stratified by demographic characteristics. We also examined screening patterns over a 5-year period. Of the 8749 women included in this study, 66.0% [95% confidence interval (CI), 65.0–67.0%] were subsequently screened within 2 years. We found slightly higher rates among Caucasians and married women. The proportion of women who received repeat mammography increased with estimated household income [9.5% difference between the highest and lowest categories (95% CI, 6.5–12.5%)]. The median time to subsequent screening was 17.7 months, and the probability of repeat screening was higher for women whose initial mammogram was between January 1992 and December 1994 compared to those receiving an initial mammogram between January 1989 and December 1991 (9.6% difference; 95% CI, 7.5–11.7%). Repeat mammography has improved over time; however, socioeconomic status could contribute to longer-than-intended intervals between screening when translated into real-world clinical practice. In a setting where most physicians recommended annual screening, we found that the median time to subsequent screening was delayed by 6 months. If annual mammography is the goal, recommendations should be made with the understanding of how the timing of repeat screening occurs in clinical practice.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				W. Rakowski, H. Meissner, S. W. Vernon, N. Breen, B. Rimer, and M. A. Clark Correlates of Repeat and Recent Mammography for Women Ages 45 to 75 in the 2002 to 2003 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 2003). Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., November 1, 2006; 15(11): 2093 - 2101. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Blanchard, J. A. Colbert, D. B. Kopans, R. Moore, E. F. Halpern, K. S. Hughes, B. L. Smith, K. K. Tanabe, and J. S. Michaelson Long-term Risk of False-Positive Screening Results and Subsequent Biopsy as a Function of Mammography Use. Radiology, August 1, 2006; 240(2): 335 - 342. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Calvocoressi, M. Stolar, S. V. Kasl, E. B. Claus, and B. A. Jones Applying Recursive Partitioning to a Prospective Study of Factors Associated with Adherence to Mammography Screening Guidelines Am. J. Epidemiol., December 15, 2005; 162(12): 1215 - 1224. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Rosenberg, L. A. Wise, J. R. Palmer, N. J. Horton, and L. L. Adams-Campbell A Multilevel Study of Socioeconomic Predictors of Regular Mammography Use Among African-American Women Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., November 1, 2005; 14(11): 2628 - 2633. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. G. Elmore, S. H. Taplin, W. E. Barlow, G. R. Cutter, C. J. D'Orsi, R. E. Hendrick, L. A. Abraham, J. S. Fosse, and P. A. Carney Does Litigation Influence Medical Practice? The Influence of Community Radiologists' Medical Malpractice Perceptions and Experience on Screening Mammography Radiology, July 1, 2005; 236(1): 37 - 46. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. K. Bobo, J. A. Shapiro, J. Schulman, and C. L. Wolters On-Schedule Mammography Rescreening in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., April 1, 2004; 13(4): 620 - 630. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Smith-Bindman, P. W. Chu, D. L. Miglioretti, E. A. Sickles, R. Blanks, R. Ballard-Barbash, J. K. Bobo, N. C. Lee, M. G. Wallis, J. Patnick, et al. Comparison of Screening Mammography in the United States and the United Kingdom JAMA, October 22, 2003; 290(16): 2129 - 2137. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. R. Partin and J. S. Slater Promoting Repeat Mammography Use: Insights From a Systematic Needs Assessment Health Educ Behav, February 1, 2003; 30(1): 97 - 112. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. U. Yood, C. C. Johnson, A. Blount, J. Abrams, E. Wolman, B. D. McCarthy, U. Raju, D. S. Nathanson, M. Worsham, and S. R. Wolman Race and Differences in Breast Cancer Survival in a Managed Care Population J Natl Cancer Inst, September 1, 1999; 91(17): 1487 - 1491. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]