English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Context: Cervical cancer screening is the primary tool for cervical cancer detection, and prevention. There are minimal safety nets in place at our institution to track screenings that are delinquent in nature. Aims: Evaluate abnormal cervical cancer screening follow-up in an outpatient Obstetrics and Gynecology (OBGYN) clinic to determine factors associated with recidivism rates. Methods: A retrospective analysis of the abnormal cervical cancer screening follow-up of patients between postgraduate-staffed OBGYN clinics, and faculty-staffed OBGYN clinics in an outpatient facility setting was conducted. Evaluation included all cervical cancer screenings conducted on women aged ≥21 years during a twoyear academic period. To determine differences by provider type, chi-square tests, and t-tests were conducted. Results: Of the 4,158 cervical cancer screenings performed, 17.6% were abnormal. Patients in postgraduate clinics were younger than in faculty clinics (34 vs 38 years, P<0.0001), and were less likely to return for follow-up (62.5% vs 79.7%, p<0.0001). More abnormal test results were ordered, and reviewed by the same person in attending clinics than postgraduate clinics (90.1% vs 43.1%, P<0.001). Among patients with an abnormal result, 53.0% in faculty clinics were established patients, compared to 24.3% of postgraduate clinic patients (P<0.0001). Conclusions: Irrespective of provider type (postgraduate or faculty), established patients are more likely to follow up after an abnormal cervical cancer screening than first-time patients. Endeavors will be put towards creating a tool for first-time patients to help improve awareness of the importance, and the process of, cervical cancer screenings in our clinics. Correspondence to: Frances W Grimstad, Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology Fellow, Children’s Mercy Hospital/ University of Missouri Kansas City, USA, Tel: 816 404 1000, E-mail: grimstadf@umkc.edu

Abnormal cervical cancer screening results in OBGYN clinics: differences in follow-up