Women with learning disabilities and access to cervical screening: retrospective cohort study using case control methods

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Several studies in the UK have suggested that women with learning disabilities may be less likely to receive cervical screening tests and a previous local study in had found that GPs considered screening unnecessary for women with le...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Stanistreet Debbi, Reynolds Fiona, Elton Peter
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2008-01-01
Series:BMC Public Health
Online Access:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/8/30
id doaj-e040aa31dc3e41a0a167df24a0e7415e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-e040aa31dc3e41a0a167df24a0e7415e2020-11-24T22:15:51ZengBMCBMC Public Health1471-24582008-01-01813010.1186/1471-2458-8-30Women with learning disabilities and access to cervical screening: retrospective cohort study using case control methodsStanistreet DebbiReynolds FionaElton Peter<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Several studies in the UK have suggested that women with learning disabilities may be less likely to receive cervical screening tests and a previous local study in had found that GPs considered screening unnecessary for women with learning disabilities. This study set out to ascertain whether women with learning disabilities are more likely to be ceased from a cervical screening programme than women without; and to examine the reasons given for ceasing women with learning disabilities. It was carried out in Bury, Heywood-and-Middleton and Rochdale.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Carried out using retrospective cohort study methods, women with learning disabilities were identified by Read code; and their cervical screening records were compared with the Call-and-Recall records of women without learning disabilities in order to examine their screening histories. Analysis was carried out using case-control methods – 1:2 (women with learning disabilities: women without learning disabilities), calculating odds ratios.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>267 women's records were compared with the records of 534 women without learning disabilities. Women with learning disabilities had an odds ratio (OR) of 0.48 (Confidence Interval (CI) 0.38 – 0.58; <it>X</it><sup>2</sup>: 72.227; p.value <.001) of receiving a cervical screening test; an OR of 2.05 (CI 1.88 – 2.22; <it>X</it><sup>2</sup>: 24.236; p.value <.001) of being ceased from screening; and an OR of 0.14 (CI 0.001 – 0.28; <it>X</it><sup>2</sup>: 286.341; p.value <0.001 of being a non-responder compared to age and practice-matched women without learning disabilities.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The reasons given for ceasing and/or not screening suggest that merely being coded as having a learning disability is <b>not </b>the sole reason for these actions. There are training needs among smear takers regarding appropriate reasons not to screen and providing screening for women with learning disabilities.</p> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/8/30
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Stanistreet Debbi
Reynolds Fiona
Elton Peter
spellingShingle Stanistreet Debbi
Reynolds Fiona
Elton Peter
Women with learning disabilities and access to cervical screening: retrospective cohort study using case control methods
BMC Public Health
author_facet Stanistreet Debbi
Reynolds Fiona
Elton Peter
author_sort Stanistreet Debbi
title Women with learning disabilities and access to cervical screening: retrospective cohort study using case control methods
title_short Women with learning disabilities and access to cervical screening: retrospective cohort study using case control methods
title_full Women with learning disabilities and access to cervical screening: retrospective cohort study using case control methods
title_fullStr Women with learning disabilities and access to cervical screening: retrospective cohort study using case control methods
title_full_unstemmed Women with learning disabilities and access to cervical screening: retrospective cohort study using case control methods
title_sort women with learning disabilities and access to cervical screening: retrospective cohort study using case control methods
publisher BMC
series BMC Public Health
issn 1471-2458
publishDate 2008-01-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Several studies in the UK have suggested that women with learning disabilities may be less likely to receive cervical screening tests and a previous local study in had found that GPs considered screening unnecessary for women with learning disabilities. This study set out to ascertain whether women with learning disabilities are more likely to be ceased from a cervical screening programme than women without; and to examine the reasons given for ceasing women with learning disabilities. It was carried out in Bury, Heywood-and-Middleton and Rochdale.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Carried out using retrospective cohort study methods, women with learning disabilities were identified by Read code; and their cervical screening records were compared with the Call-and-Recall records of women without learning disabilities in order to examine their screening histories. Analysis was carried out using case-control methods – 1:2 (women with learning disabilities: women without learning disabilities), calculating odds ratios.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>267 women's records were compared with the records of 534 women without learning disabilities. Women with learning disabilities had an odds ratio (OR) of 0.48 (Confidence Interval (CI) 0.38 – 0.58; <it>X</it><sup>2</sup>: 72.227; p.value <.001) of receiving a cervical screening test; an OR of 2.05 (CI 1.88 – 2.22; <it>X</it><sup>2</sup>: 24.236; p.value <.001) of being ceased from screening; and an OR of 0.14 (CI 0.001 – 0.28; <it>X</it><sup>2</sup>: 286.341; p.value <0.001 of being a non-responder compared to age and practice-matched women without learning disabilities.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The reasons given for ceasing and/or not screening suggest that merely being coded as having a learning disability is <b>not </b>the sole reason for these actions. There are training needs among smear takers regarding appropriate reasons not to screen and providing screening for women with learning disabilities.</p>
url http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/8/30
work_keys_str_mv AT stanistreetdebbi womenwithlearningdisabilitiesandaccesstocervicalscreeningretrospectivecohortstudyusingcasecontrolmethods
AT reynoldsfiona womenwithlearningdisabilitiesandaccesstocervicalscreeningretrospectivecohortstudyusingcasecontrolmethods
AT eltonpeter womenwithlearningdisabilitiesandaccesstocervicalscreeningretrospectivecohortstudyusingcasecontrolmethods
_version_ 1725792675306668032