Skip Navigation
American College of Physicians Logo
  • Subscribe
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Sign In
    Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
    INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
    Sign In|Set Up Account
    You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
    INSTITUTIONAL SIGN IN
    Open Athens|Shibboleth|Log In
    Annals of Internal Medicine
    SUBSCRIBE
    Subscribe to Annals of Internal Medicine.
    You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your purchase.
Annals of Internal Medicine Logo Menu
  • Latest
  • Issues
  • Channels
  • CME/MOC
  • In the Clinic
  • Journal Club
  • Web Exclusives
  • Author Info
Advanced Search
  • ‹ PREV ARTICLE
  • This Issue
  • NEXT ARTICLE ›
Summaries for Patients |3 November 2009

A National Survey of Doctors About Screening for Cervical Cancer Free

Article, Author, and Disclosure Information
Author, Article, and Disclosure Information
  • The summary below is from the full report titled “Specialty Differences in Primary Care Physician Reports of Papanicolaou Test Screening Practices: A National Survey, 2006 to 2007.” It is in the 3 November 2009 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine (volume 151, pages 602-611). The authors are K.R. Yabroff, M. Saraiya, H.I. Meissner, D.A. Haggstrom, L. Wideroff, G. Yuan, Z. Berkowitz, W.W. Davis, V.B. Benard, and S.S. Coughlin.


Summaries for Patients are a service provided by Annals to help patients better understand the complicated and often mystifying language of modern medicine.
Summaries for Patients are presented for informational purposes only. These summaries are not a substitute for advice from your own medical provider. If you have questions about this material, or need medical advice about your own health or situation, please contact your physician. The summaries may be reproduced for not-for-profit educational purposes only. Any other uses must be approved by the American College of Physicians.
×
  • ‹ PREV ARTICLE
  • This Issue
  • NEXT ARTICLE ›
Jump To
  • Full Article
  • FULL ARTICLE
  • FULL ARTICLE
    • What is the problem and what is known about it so far?
    • Why did the researchers do this particular study?
    • Who was studied?
    • How was the study done?
    • What did the researchers find?
    • What were the limitations of the study?
    • What are the implications of the study?
  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Supplements
  • Audio/Video
  • Summary for Patients
  • Clinical Slide Sets
  • CME / MOC
  • Comments
  • Twitter Link
  • Facebook Link
  • Email Link
More
  • LinkedIn Link
  • CiteULike Link

What is the problem and what is known about it so far?

Cervical cancer is cancer of the cervix (the lower part of the uterus or womb). Infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) increases a woman's chances of getting cervical cancer. People get the virus by having unprotected sexual intercourse with a person infected with HPV.
Doctors use Papanicolaou (Pap) smears to screen for cervical cancer. “Screening for cancer” means looking for cancer before a person has symptoms. To perform a Pap smear, doctors use a swab during an internal examination of the vagina to take a sample of cells from the cervix to look at under a microscope. If the Pap test shows abnormal cells, the woman needs a test called colposcopy. Colposcopy lets doctors look at the cervix with magnification and take larger samples of abnormal areas to search for cancer.
Having a Pap smear every 1 to 3 years prevents cervical cancer by finding it at early, treatable stages. It is also possible to test for HPV, but we do not yet know the best way to combine HPV and Pap tests in cervical cancer screening. Some doctors test women for HPV only if the Pap smear shows abnormal cells that are not clearly cancerous. Other programs use both tests together for all women older than 30 years. Several organizations have guidelines for cervical cancer screening. These guidelines specify the ages to start and stop screening and how often to screen based on a woman's health and sexual history.

Why did the researchers do this particular study?

To compare the cervical cancer screening behaviors of gynecologists, family doctors, and internal medicine doctors.

Who was studied?

A national sample of 1212 primary care doctors (gynecologists, family doctors, and general internal medicine doctors) during 2006 to 2007.

How was the study done?

The doctors were given a survey that asked about themselves and their practices. It also gave short descriptions of hypothetical patients with different ages and different sexual, health, and screening histories. The researchers asked the doctors how they would screen each of these patients for cervical cancer. The researchers compared the doctors' answers with the guidelines. They also compared the recommendations of the 3 specialties.

What did the researchers find?

Most of the surveyed doctors said that they provided Pap tests. However, less than one quarter of surveyed doctors had survey responses that completely agreed with guideline recommendations. Internal medicine doctors most often reported screening practices that agreed with the guidelines, followed by family doctors and then gynecologists. Yet, only 27.5% of internists had guideline-consistent responses. When the doctors' responses differed from guideline recommendations, it was usually because the doctors recommended screening when the guideline did not or more often than the guideline did.

What were the limitations of the study?

This study only asked the doctors what they would do; it did not collect information on how the doctors screened real patients.

What are the implications of the study?

Many doctors reported cervical cancer screening practices that do not agree with the guidelines and reported overuse of cervical cancer screening.

Clinical Slide Sets

Terms of Use

The In the Clinic® slide sets are owned and copyrighted by the American College of Physicians (ACP). All text, graphics, trademarks, and other intellectual property incorporated into the slide sets remain the sole and exclusive property of the ACP. The slide sets may be used only by the person who downloads or purchases them and only for the purpose of presenting them during not-for-profit educational activities. Users may incorporate the entire slide set or selected individual slides into their own teaching presentations but may not alter the content of the slides in any way or remove the ACP copyright notice. Users may make print copies for use as hand-outs for the audience the user is personally addressing but may not otherwise reproduce or distribute the slides by any means or media, including but not limited to sending them as e-mail attachments, posting them on Internet or Intranet sites, publishing them in meeting proceedings, or making them available for sale or distribution in any unauthorized form, without the express written permission of the ACP. Unauthorized use of the In the Clinic slide sets will constitute copyright infringement.

This feature is available only to Registered Users

Subscribe/Learn More
Submit a Comment

0 Comments

PDF
Not Available
Citations
Citation

A National Survey of Doctors About Screening for Cervical Cancer. Ann Intern Med. ;151:I–38. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-9-200911030-00002

Download citation file:

  • Ris (Zotero)
  • EndNote
  • BibTex
  • Medlars
  • ProCite
  • RefWorks
  • Reference Manager

© 2019

×
Permissions

Published: Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(9):I-38.

DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-9-200911030-00002

©
2009 American College of Physicians
0 Citations

See Also

Specialty Differences in Primary Care Physician Reports of Papanicolaou Test Screening Practices: A National Survey, 2006 to 2007
View MoreView Less

Related Articles

Cervical Cancer Screening: The Transformational Role of Routine Human Papillomavirus Testing
Annals of Internal Medicine; 168 (1): 75-76
Rethinking How to Measure the Appropriateness of Cervical Cancer Screening
Annals of Internal Medicine; 167 (6): 445-446
Update in Women's Health: Evidence Published in 2016
Annals of Internal Medicine; 166 (7): W48-W52
Inefficiencies and High-Value Improvements in U.S. Cervical Cancer Screening Practice: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
Annals of Internal Medicine; 163 (8): 589-597
View MoreView Less

Journal Club

Review: Self-collected samples are less accurate for HPV testing than clinician-collected samples
Annals of Internal Medicine; 161 (4): JC11
View MoreView Less

Related Topics

Cancer Screening/Prevention
Hematology/Oncology
Prevention/Screening

Cancer Screening/Prevention, Hematology/Oncology, Prevention/Screening.

CME/MOC Activity Requires Users to be Registered and Logged In.
Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
Sign In|Set Up Account
You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
Annals of Internal Medicine
CREATE YOUR FREE ACCOUNT
Create Your Free Account|Why?
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×
The Comments Feature Requires Users to be Registered and Logged In.
Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
Sign In|Set Up Account
You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
Annals of Internal Medicine
CREATE YOUR FREE ACCOUNT
Create Your Free Account|Why?
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×
link to top

Content

  • Home
  • Latest
  • Issues
  • Channels
  • CME/MOC
  • In the Clinic
  • Journal Club
  • Web Exclusives

Information For

  • Author Info
  • Reviewers
  • Press
  • Readers
  • Institutions / Libraries / Agencies
  • Advertisers

Services

  • Subscribe
  • Renew
  • Alerts
  • Current Issue RSS
  • Latest RSS
  • In the Clinic RSS
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • Help
  • About Annals
  • About Mobile
  • Patient Information
  • Teaching Tools
  • Annals in the News
  • Share Your Feedback

Awards and Cover

  • Personae (Cover Photo)
  • Junior Investigator Awards
  • Poetry Prize

Other Resources

  • ACP Online
  • Career Connection
  • ACP Advocate Blog
  • ACP Journal Wise

Follow Annals On

  • Twitter Link
  • Facebook Link
acp link acp
silverchair link silverchair

Copyright © 2019 American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.

Print ISSN: 0003-4819 | Online ISSN: 1539-3704

Privacy Policy

|

Conditions of Use

This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our privacy policy. | Accept
×

You need a subscription to this content to use this feature.

×
PDF Downloads Require Access to the Full Article.
Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
Sign In|Set Up Account
You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
INSTITUTIONAL SIGN IN
Open Athens|Shibboleth|Log In
Annals of Internal Medicine
PURCHASE OPTIONS
Buy This Article|Subscribe
You will be redirected to acponline.org to sign-in to Annals to complete your purchase.
CREATE YOUR FREE ACCOUNT
Create Your Free Account|Why?
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×
Access to this Free Content Requires Users to be Registered and Logged In. Please Choose One of the Following Options
Sign in below to access your subscription for full content
INDIVIDUAL SIGN IN
Sign In|Set Up Account
You will be directed to acponline.org to register and create your Annals account
Annals of Internal Medicine
CREATE YOUR FREE ACCOUNT
Create Your Free Account|Why?
To receive access to the full text of freely available articles, alerts, and more. You will be directed to acponline.org to complete your registration.
×