Using patient and general practice characteristics to explain variations in cervical smear uptake rates

Objectives: To produce practice and patient20variables for general practices from census and family health services authority data, and to determine the importance of these variables in explaining variation in cervical smear uptake rates between practices. Design: Population based study examining va...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMJ 1994-05, Vol.308 (6939), p.1272-1276
Hauptverfasser: Majeed, F A, Cook, D G, Anderson, H R, Hilton, S, Bunn, S, Stones, C
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objectives: To produce practice and patient20variables for general practices from census and family health services authority data, and to determine the importance of these variables in explaining variation in cervical smear uptake rates between practices. Design: Population based study examining variations in cervical smear uptake rates among 126 general practices using routine data. Setting: Merton, Sutton, and Wandsworth Family Health Services Authority, which covers parts of inner and outer London. Main outcome measure: Percentage of women aged 25-64 years registered with a general practitioner who had undergone a cervical smear test during the five and a half years preceding 31 March 1992. Results: Cervical smear uptake rates varied from 16.5% to 94.1%. The estimated percentage of practice population from ethnic minority groups correlated negatively with uptake rates (r=-0.42), as did variables associated with social deprivation such as overcrowding (r=-0.42), not owning a car (r=-0.41), and unemployment (r=-0.40). Percentage of practice population under 5 years of age correlated positively with uptake rate (r=0.42). Rates were higher in practices with a female partner than in those without (66.6% v 49.1%; difference 17.5% (95% confidence interval 10.5% to 24.5%)), and in computerised than in non- computerised practices (64.5% v 50.5%; 14.0% (6.4% to 21.6%)). Rates were higher in larger practices. In a stepwise multiple regression model that explained 52% of variation, five factors wre significant predictors of uptake rates: presence of a female partner; children under 5; overcrowding; number of women aged 35-44 as percentage of all women aged 25-64; change of address in past year. Conclusions: Over half of variation in cervical smear uptake rates can be explained by patient and practice variables derived from census and family health services authority data; these variables may have a role in explaining variations in performance of general practices and in producing adjusted measures of practice performance. Practices with a female partner had substantially higher uptake rates.
ISSN:0959-8138
1468-5833
1756-1833
DOI:10.1136/bmj.308.6939.1272