IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/clnure/v11y2002i4p433-449.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nurse Practitioners and Preventive Screening in the Hospital

Author

Listed:
  • Carol Genet Kelley
  • Barbara J. Daly
  • Mary K. Anthony
  • Jaclene A. Zauszniewski

    (Case Western Reserve University School of Nursing)

  • Kurt C. Stange

    (University Hospitals of Cleveland Case Western Reserve University)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate a reminder to discuss cervical cancer screening with hospitalized females. A quasi-experimental design was used to compare the association of a reminder intervention for nurse practitioners with two outcomes: prevalence of cervical cancer screening as documented in patients’ charts and patients’ self-report of cervical cancer screening 4 months after discharge. Data were collected by chart review and phone survey. The sample consisted of nurse practitioners caring for eligible female patients at a university teaching hospital. Chi-square was used to test all research questions. The rate of documentation of cervical cancer screening increased from 2% to 69% after implementation of the reminder intervention. The reminder intervention did not impact patients actually receiving Pap smears after discharge. The significant increase in documentation of screening associated with the use of the single reminder in the patients’ charts support the use of this low-cost intervention.

Suggested Citation

  • Carol Genet Kelley & Barbara J. Daly & Mary K. Anthony & Jaclene A. Zauszniewski & Kurt C. Stange, 2002. "Nurse Practitioners and Preventive Screening in the Hospital," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 11(4), pages 433-449, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:11:y:2002:i:4:p:433-449
    DOI: 10.1177/105477302237455
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/105477302237455
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/105477302237455?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Montano, D.E. & Phillips, W.R., 1995. "Cancer screening by primary care physicians: A comparison of rates obtained from physician self-report, patient survey, and chart audit," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 85(6), pages 795-800.
    2. Lantz, P.M. & Stencil, D. & Lippert, M.T. & Beversdorf, S. & Jaros, L. & Remington, P.L., 1995. "Erratum: Breast and cervical cancer screening in a low-income managed care sample: The efficacy of physician letters and phone calls (American Journal of Public Health (1995) 85 (834-836))," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 85(8), pages 1063-1063.
    3. Bowman, Jennifer Ann & Sanson-Fisher, Rob & Redman, Sally, 1997. "The accuracy of self-reported Pap smear utilisation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 969-976, April.
    4. Lantz, P.M. & Stencil, D. & Lippert, M.T. & Beversdorf, S. & Jaros, L. & Remington, P.L., 1995. "Breast and cervical cancer screening in a low-income managed care sample: The efficacy of physician letters and phone calls," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 85(6), pages 834-836.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jacques L Tamuzi & Ley M Muyaya & Jonathan L Tshimwanga & Linda Zeng, 2017. "Effectiveness of Mhealth to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening: Systematic Review of Interventions," International Journal of Pulmonary & Respiratory Sciences, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 2(3), pages 1-11, October.
    2. Jacques L Tamuzi & Ley M Muyaya & Jonathan L Tshimwanga & Linda Zeng, 2017. "Effectiveness of Mhealth to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening: Systematic Review of Interventions," International Journal of Pulmonary & Respiratory Sciences, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 2(3), pages 49-59, October.
    3. Raf Van Gastel & Tim Goedemé & Julie Janssens & Eva Lefevere & Rik Lemkens, 2017. "A Reminder to Pay Less for Healthcare: take-up of Increased Reimbursement in a large-scale randomized field experiment," Working Papers 1712, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    4. Jonah Musa & Chad J Achenbach & Linda C O’Dwyer & Charlesnika T Evans & Megan McHugh & Lifang Hou & Melissa A Simon & Robert L Murphy & Neil Jordan, 2017. "Effect of cervical cancer education and provider recommendation for screening on screening rates: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-28, September.
    5. Anne-Marie Konopka & Thomas Barnay & Nathalie Billaudeau & Christine Sevilla-Dedieu, 2019. "Les déterminants du recours au dépistage du cancer du col de l’utérus : une analyse départementale," Erudite Working Paper 2019-19, Erudite.
    6. Chattopadhyay, Sajal K. & Ebrahim, Shahul H. & Tao, Guoyu & McKenna, Matthew T., 2005. "Use of cervical cancer screening among insured women: the extent of missed opportunities," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 194-201, August.
    7. Pelletier-Fleury, Nathalie & Le Vaillant, Marc & Szidon, Philippe & Marie, Patrice & Raineri, Francois & Sicotte, Claude, 2007. "Preventive service delivery: A new insight into French general practice," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(2-3), pages 268-276, October.
    8. Joshua C. Denny & Neesha N. Choma & Josh F. Peterson & Randolph A. Miller & Lisa Bastarache & Ming Li & Neeraja B. Peterson, 2012. "Natural Language Processing Improves Identification of Colorectal Cancer Testing in the Electronic Medical Record," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(1), pages 188-197, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:11:y:2002:i:4:p:433-449. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.