Advertisement

Screening Mammography Rates in the Medicare Population before and after the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Guideline Change: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis

  • Miao Jiang
    Correspondence
    Correspondence to: Miao Jiang, PhD, Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute, 1891 Preston White Drive, Reston, VA 20191. Phone: 703-648-0690; fax: 703-391-1757.
    Affiliations
    Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute, Reston, Virginia

    Department of Health Administration and Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia
    Search for articles by this author
  • Danny R. Hughes
    Affiliations
    Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute, Reston, Virginia

    Department of Health Administration and Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia
    Search for articles by this author
  • Richard Duszak Jr.
    Affiliations
    Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute, Reston, Virginia

    Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia
    Search for articles by this author

      Abstract

      Objective

      We sought to examine longitudinal trends in screening mammography utilization and the presence of any changes in utilization associated with the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guideline change.

      Methods

      We use 2005 through 2012 Medicare fee-for-service claims data for a 5% sample of randomly selected beneficiaries. The primary outcome is monthly mammography rate per 1,000 women. Two comparison outcomes are monthly Papanicolaou test rate and monthly routine eye examination rate. The statistical approach is interrupted time series with segmented regression analysis and nonequivalent dependent variables.

      Results

      Among women age 65 and 90, monthly screening mammography rates were significantly increasing before the 2009 USPSTF guideline change. Immediately after the guidelines, there was a significant drop of 1.76 per 1,000 women (p < .001). Three years after the guideline, and after the initial decrease, there was no significant change in rate for those aged 65 to 74, but a continued and significant decline for those aged 75 and older. Two other preventive services (Papanicolaou test and routine eye examinations) did not show any shift associated with the pre- and post-guideline window.

      Conclusions

      The 2009 revision of USPSTF guidelines on breast cancer was associated with an immediate and significant decrease in screening mammography rates. The long-term impact of the guideline change differs by age and race and may not be fully quantifiable for years after its implementation.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
      Subscribe to Women's Health Issues
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. American Optometric Association. (2014). Recommended eye examination frequency for pediatric patients and adults. Available: http://www.aoa.org/patients-and-public/caring-for-your-vision/comprehensive-eye-and-vision-examination/recommended-examination-frequency-for-pediatric-patients-and-adults?sso=y. Accessed September 18, 2014.

        • Bleyer A.
        • Welch H.G.
        Effect of three decades of screening mammography on breast-cancer incidence.
        New England Journal of Medicine. 2012; 367: 1998-2005
        • Block L.D.
        • Jarlenski M.P.
        • Wu A.W.
        • Bennett W.L.
        Mammography use among women ages 40-49 after the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation.
        Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2013; 28: 1447-1453
      2. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. (2012). Pap tests/pelvic exams (screening). Available: http://www.medicare.gov/coverage/pap-tests-pelvic-exams-screening.html. Accessed September 18, 2014.

        • Elmore J.G.
        • Armstrong K.
        • Lehman C.D.
        • Fletcher S.W.
        Screening for breast cancer.
        JAMA. 2005; 293: 1245-1256
        • Gøtzsche P.C.
        • Olsen O.
        Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable?.
        Lancet. 2000; 355: 129-134
        • Hawton K.
        • Bergen H.
        • Simkin S.
        • Brock A.
        • Griffiths C.
        • Romeri E.
        • Gunnell D.
        • et al.
        Effect of withdrawal of co-proxamol on prescribing and deaths from drug poisoning in England and Wales: Time series analysis.
        British Medical Journal. 2009; 338: 1-5
        • Hawton K.
        • Bergen H.
        • Simkin S.
        • Wells C.
        • Kapur N.
        • Gunnell D.
        Six-year follow-up of impact of co-proxamol withdrawal in England and Wales on prescribing and deaths: Time-series study.
        PLoS Medicine. 2012; 9: e1001213
        • Howard D.H.
        • Adams E.K.
        Mammography rates after the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force breast cancer screening recommendation.
        Preventive Medicine. 2012; 55: 485-487
        • Humphrey L.L.
        • Helfand M.
        • Chan B.K.
        • Woolf S.H.
        Breast cancer screening: A summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
        Annals of Internal Medicine. 2002; 137: 347-360
        • Jemal A.
        • Center M.M.
        • DeSantis C.
        • Ward E.M.
        Global patterns of cancer incidence and mortality rates and trends.
        Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. 2010; 19: 1893-1907
        • Jiang M.
        • Hughes D.R.
        • Appleton C.M.
        • McGinty G.
        • Duszak R.
        Recent trends in adherence to continuous screening for breast cancer among Medicare beneficiaries.
        Preventive Medicine. 2015; 73C: 47-52
        • Kachalia A.
        • Mello M.M.
        Breast cancer screening: Conflicting guidelines and medicolegal risk.
        JAMA. 2013; 309: 2555-2556
        • Ma Z.
        • Kuller L.H.
        • Fisher M.A.
        • Ostroff S.M.
        Use of interrupted time-series method to evaluate the impact of cigarette excise tax increases in Pennsylvania, 2000-2009.
        Preventing Chronic Disease. 2013; 10: E169
        • Michielutte R.
        • Shelton B.
        • Paskett E.D.
        • Tatum C.M.
        • Velez R.
        Use of an interrupted time-series design to evaluate a cancer screening program.
        Health Education Research. 2000; 15: 615-623
      3. National Cancer Institute. (2014). SEER cancer statistics review, 1975-2011. Bethesda, MD. Available: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2011/. Accessed April 9, 2014.

        • Pace L.E.
        • He Y.
        • Keating N.L.
        Trends in mammography screening rates after publication of the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations.
        Cancer. 2013; 119: 2518-2523
        • Penfold R.B.
        • Zhang F.
        Use of interrupted time series analysis in evaluating health care quality improvements.
        Academic Pediatrics. 2013; 13: S38-S44
        • Salloum R.G.
        • Kohler R.E.
        • Jensen G.A.
        • Sheridan S.L.
        • Carpenter W.R.
        • Biddle A.K.
        U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations and cancer screening among female Medicare beneficiaries.
        Journal of Women's Health (2002). 2014; 23: 211-217
        • Shadish W.R.
        • Cook T.D.
        • Campbell D.T.
        Experimental and quasi-experiment design for generalized causal inference.
        Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA2002
        • Sharpe R.E.
        • Levin D.C.
        • Parker L.
        • Rao V.M.
        The effect of the controversial US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations on the use of screening mammography.
        Journal of the American College of Radiology. 2013; 10: 21-24
        • Smith R.A.
        • Cokkinides V.
        • von Eschenbach A.C.
        • Levin B.
        • Cohen C.
        • Runowicz C.D.
        • Eyre H.J.
        • et al.
        American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer.
        CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2002; 52: 8-22
        • Sprague B.L.
        • Bolton K.C.
        • Mace J.L.
        • Herschorn S.D.
        • James T.A.
        • Vacek P.M.
        • Geller B.M.
        • et al.
        Registry-based study of trends in breast cancer screening mammography before and after the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations.
        Radiology. 2014; 270: 354-361
        • Tabár L.
        • Duffy S.W.
        • Vitak B.
        • Chen H.H.
        • Prevost T.C.
        The natural history of breast carcinoma: What have we learned from screening?.
        Cancer. 1999; 86: 449-462
        • U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)
        Screening for cervical cancer: recommendations and rationale.
        American Journal of Nursing. 2003; 103: 101-102
        • U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)
        Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.
        Annals of Internal Medicine. 2009; 151: 716-726
      4. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). (2012). Screening for cervical cancer. Available: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf11/cervcancer/cervcancerrs.htm. Accessed April 9, 2014.

        • Wagner a K.
        • Soumerai S.B.
        • Zhang F.
        • Ross-Degnan D.
        Segmented regression analysis of interrupted time series studies in medication use research.
        Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics. 2002; 27: 299-309
        • Walter L.C.
        • Schonberg M.A.
        Screening mammography in older women: A review.
        JAMA. 2014; 311: 1336-1347
        • Wang A.T.
        • Fan J.
        • Van Houten H.K.
        • Tilburt J.C.
        • Stout N.K.
        • Montori V.M.
        • Shah N.D.
        Impact of the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines on screening mammography rates on women in their 40s.
        PLoS One. 2014; 9: e91399
        • Welch H.G.
        Screening mammography–A long run for a short slide?.
        New England Journal of Medicine. 2010; 363: 1276-1278
        • Welch H.G.
        • Hayes K.J.
        • Frost C.
        Repeat testing among Medicare beneficiaries.
        Archives of Internal Medicine. 2012; 172: 1745-1751
      5. Zhang, F., Wagner, A., S. B., Soumerai, & Ross-Degnan, D. (2002). Estimating confidence intervals around relative changes in outcomes in segmented regression analyses of time series data. Available: http://www.lexjansen.com/nesug/nesug02/st/st005.pdf.

        • Zur J.
        • Mojtabai R.
        Medicaid expansion initiative in Massachusetts: Enrollment among substance-abusing homeless adults.
        American Journal of Public Health. 2013; 103: 2007-2013

      Biography

      Miao Jiang, PhD, is a research fellow at the Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute and adjunct faculty with the Department of Health Administration and Policy, George Mason University. Her areas of interest include evaluation of health policy and public health intervention programs.

      Biography

      Danny R. Hughes, PhD, is senior research fellow at the Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute and adjunct faculty with the Department of Health Administration and Policy, George Mason University. His areas of interest include economic evaluation of policy, technology and innovation in health care delivery system.

      Biography

      Richard Duszak, Jr., MD, is Vice Chair for Health Policy and Practice in the Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences at Emory University and Chief Medical Officer of the Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute. His areas of interest include health policy and health system management relevant to medical imaging.