Open AccessCervical Cancer Screening Access, Outcomes, and Prevalence of Dysplasia in Correctional Facilities: A Systematic Review
Author(s) -
E. Christine Brousseau,
Sangtae Ahn,
Kristen A. Matteson
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
journal of women's health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.195
H-Index - 98
eISSN - 1931-843X
pISSN - 1540-9996
DOI - 10.1089/jwh.2018.7440
Subject(s) - medicine , cervical cancer , cinahl , population , dysplasia , psychological intervention , gynecology , cervical cancer screening , cancer , obstetrics , family medicine , environmental health , psychiatry
Background: Incarcerated women often access health care primarily through contact with correctional systems. Cervical cancer screening within the correctional system can address the preventable outcome of cervical dysplasia and cancer in this high-risk population. Materials and Methods: A search of PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted for articles published between January, 1966 and December, 2018. All studies on a population of jailed or incarcerated females and at least one of the following outcomes: cervical cancer or dysplasia, pap smear screening, knowledge about screening, treatment of cervical dysplasia, and compliance with follow-up were analyzed. Results: Forty-two studies met inclusion criteria. All 21 studies with prevalence outcomes described a higher prevalence of cervical dysplasia and cancer in the women involved with corrections, compared to a variety of different sources that served as community control groups. The data on screening outcomes were inconsistent. Follow-up compliance for abnormal results was poor, with a study finding that only 21% of women were rescreened within 6 months of the recommended time period. Knowledge about cervical cancer and screening was evaluated in eight studies and was poor across all studies. Conclusion: Women involved in correctional systems have a higher prevalence of cervical dysplasia and cancer than women in the general population. Acceptance of screening varies, and no published interventions have been shown to improve screening within the prison system. Treatment and compliance with follow-up recommendations are extremely poor and should be a focus of future research.