4.3 Article

Receipt of Cervical Cancer Screening in Female Veterans: Impact of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Depression

Journal

WOMENS HEALTH ISSUES
Volume 23, Issue 3, Pages E153-E159

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.whi.2013.03.002

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: We evaluated receipt of cervical cancer screening in a national sample of 34,213 women veterans using Veteran Health Administration facilities between 2003 and 2007 and diagnosed with 1) posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), or 2) depression, or 3) no psychiatric illness. Methods: Our study featured a cross-sectional design in which logistic regression analyses compared receipt of recommended cervical cancer screening for all three diagnostic groups. Results: Cervical cancer screening rates varied minimally by diagnostic group: 77% of women with PTSD versus 75% with depression versus 75% without psychiatric illness were screened during the study observation period (p <.001). However, primary care use was associated with differential odds of screening in women with versus without psychiatric illness (PTSD or depression), even after adjustment for age, income and physical comorbidities (Wald Chi-square (2): 126.59; p <.0001). Specifically, among low users of primary care services, women with PTSD or depression were more likely than those with no psychiatric diagnoses to receive screening. Among high users of primary care services, they were less likely to receive screening. Conclusion: Psychiatric illness (PTSD or depression) had little to no effect on receipt of cervical cancer screening. Our finding that high use of primary care services was not associated with comparable odds of screening in women with versus without psychiatric illness suggests that providers caring for women with PTSD or depression and high use of primary care services should be especially attentive to their preventive healthcare needs. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available