Communicating Cervical Cancer Screening Results in Light of New Guidelines: Clinical Practices at Federally Qualified Health Centers

Katharine J. Head, Nicole L. Johnson, Susanna Foxworthy Scott, Gregory Zimet

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

New guidelines for cervical cancer screening (CCS) incorporate both HPV and Pap tests, and there is a need to understand communication of these cotesting results to patients, especially in at-risk populations disproportionally affected by cervical cancer. This study used computer-assisted telephone interviews in 2017 at 51 federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Indiana to evaluate the characteristics of clinical communication CCS results to women. Results revealed that clinical communication practices varied on channel, timing, and content. Almost half of the clinics (n = 23, 45%) communicate results to patients by phone. Most clinics (n = 47, 92%) notify patients of results in two weeks or less. For cotesting, 70% (n = 36) always communicate Pap/HPV results at the same time. The majority of clinics (n = 42, 82%) explain the type of abnormal Pap test, while only 43% (n = 22) discuss the cervical cancer risk as indicated by the HPV test result. Even though 98% (n = 48) of participants rated their communication strategy as effective, qualitatively participants acknowledged difficulties in communicating cotesting results with their often transient and low health literate patients populations. These results indicate considerable variation and potential deficits in clinical communication of cotesting results in FQHCs, but several promising communication strategies were identified that may inform improved screening communication for other clinics.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalHealth Communication
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Early Detection of Cancer
Practice Guidelines
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
Screening
cancer
Communication
Health
communication
health
Papanicolaou Test
computer-assisted telephone interview
Telephone
deficit
Guidelines
Interviews
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • Communication

Cite this

Communicating Cervical Cancer Screening Results in Light of New Guidelines : Clinical Practices at Federally Qualified Health Centers. / Head, Katharine J.; Johnson, Nicole L.; Scott, Susanna Foxworthy; Zimet, Gregory.

In: Health Communication, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f2639848d3b648019d06e8d72f3ea6c9,
title = "Communicating Cervical Cancer Screening Results in Light of New Guidelines: Clinical Practices at Federally Qualified Health Centers",
abstract = "New guidelines for cervical cancer screening (CCS) incorporate both HPV and Pap tests, and there is a need to understand communication of these cotesting results to patients, especially in at-risk populations disproportionally affected by cervical cancer. This study used computer-assisted telephone interviews in 2017 at 51 federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Indiana to evaluate the characteristics of clinical communication CCS results to women. Results revealed that clinical communication practices varied on channel, timing, and content. Almost half of the clinics (n = 23, 45{\%}) communicate results to patients by phone. Most clinics (n = 47, 92{\%}) notify patients of results in two weeks or less. For cotesting, 70{\%} (n = 36) always communicate Pap/HPV results at the same time. The majority of clinics (n = 42, 82{\%}) explain the type of abnormal Pap test, while only 43{\%} (n = 22) discuss the cervical cancer risk as indicated by the HPV test result. Even though 98{\%} (n = 48) of participants rated their communication strategy as effective, qualitatively participants acknowledged difficulties in communicating cotesting results with their often transient and low health literate patients populations. These results indicate considerable variation and potential deficits in clinical communication of cotesting results in FQHCs, but several promising communication strategies were identified that may inform improved screening communication for other clinics.",
author = "Head, {Katharine J.} and Johnson, {Nicole L.} and Scott, {Susanna Foxworthy} and Gregory Zimet",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/10410236.2019.1593079",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Health Communication",
issn = "1041-0236",
publisher = "Routledge",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Communicating Cervical Cancer Screening Results in Light of New Guidelines

T2 - Clinical Practices at Federally Qualified Health Centers

AU - Head, Katharine J.

AU - Johnson, Nicole L.

AU - Scott, Susanna Foxworthy

AU - Zimet, Gregory

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - New guidelines for cervical cancer screening (CCS) incorporate both HPV and Pap tests, and there is a need to understand communication of these cotesting results to patients, especially in at-risk populations disproportionally affected by cervical cancer. This study used computer-assisted telephone interviews in 2017 at 51 federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Indiana to evaluate the characteristics of clinical communication CCS results to women. Results revealed that clinical communication practices varied on channel, timing, and content. Almost half of the clinics (n = 23, 45%) communicate results to patients by phone. Most clinics (n = 47, 92%) notify patients of results in two weeks or less. For cotesting, 70% (n = 36) always communicate Pap/HPV results at the same time. The majority of clinics (n = 42, 82%) explain the type of abnormal Pap test, while only 43% (n = 22) discuss the cervical cancer risk as indicated by the HPV test result. Even though 98% (n = 48) of participants rated their communication strategy as effective, qualitatively participants acknowledged difficulties in communicating cotesting results with their often transient and low health literate patients populations. These results indicate considerable variation and potential deficits in clinical communication of cotesting results in FQHCs, but several promising communication strategies were identified that may inform improved screening communication for other clinics.

AB - New guidelines for cervical cancer screening (CCS) incorporate both HPV and Pap tests, and there is a need to understand communication of these cotesting results to patients, especially in at-risk populations disproportionally affected by cervical cancer. This study used computer-assisted telephone interviews in 2017 at 51 federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Indiana to evaluate the characteristics of clinical communication CCS results to women. Results revealed that clinical communication practices varied on channel, timing, and content. Almost half of the clinics (n = 23, 45%) communicate results to patients by phone. Most clinics (n = 47, 92%) notify patients of results in two weeks or less. For cotesting, 70% (n = 36) always communicate Pap/HPV results at the same time. The majority of clinics (n = 42, 82%) explain the type of abnormal Pap test, while only 43% (n = 22) discuss the cervical cancer risk as indicated by the HPV test result. Even though 98% (n = 48) of participants rated their communication strategy as effective, qualitatively participants acknowledged difficulties in communicating cotesting results with their often transient and low health literate patients populations. These results indicate considerable variation and potential deficits in clinical communication of cotesting results in FQHCs, but several promising communication strategies were identified that may inform improved screening communication for other clinics.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85063982081&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85063982081&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10410236.2019.1593079

DO - 10.1080/10410236.2019.1593079

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85063982081

JO - Health Communication

JF - Health Communication

SN - 1041-0236

ER -