4.5 Review

Cervical Cancer Screening Access, Outcomes, and Prevalence of Dysplasia in Correctional Facilities: A Systematic Review

Journal

JOURNAL OF WOMENS HEALTH
Volume 28, Issue 12, Pages 1661-1669

Publisher

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2018.7440

Keywords

cervical dysplasia; cervical cancer screening; correctional facility; jail; prison; cervical cancer

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [K12HD050108]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

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.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available