Performance characteristics of visualising the cervix in symptomatic young females: a review of primary care records in females with and without cervical cancer
- Resource Type
- Authors
- Willie Hamilton; Peter Sasieni; A. Hollingworth; Anita Wey Wey Lim; Sally Stapley
- Source
- British Journal of General Practice. 66:e189-e192
- Subject
- Cervical cancer
Gynecology
medicine.medical_specialty
education.field_of_study
medicine.diagnostic_test
Referral
Obstetrics
business.industry
Medical record
Population
Cancer
Physical examination
medicine.disease
03 medical and health sciences
0302 clinical medicine
medicine.anatomical_structure
030220 oncology & carcinogenesis
medicine
030212 general & internal medicine
Young adult
Family Practice
education
business
Cervix
- Language
- ISSN
- 1478-5242
0960-1643
Background The current strategy for timely detection of cervical cancer in young females centres on visualising the cervix when females present with gynaecological symptoms, but is based on expert opinion without an evidence base. Aim To assess visualising the cervix in primary care in young females with gynaecological symptoms. Design and setting A review of primary care records for females in England aged 20–29 years with cervical cancer (nationwide interview-based study) and in the general population (Clinical Practice Research Datalink database). Method From primary care records the proportion of females was identified with gynaecological symptoms who had documented cervical examination in the year before diagnosis (cancers) and in 1-year age bands (general population). Of these, the proportion was identified that was then referred for suspected malignancy. Results Only 39% of young females with cervical cancer had documented examination at symptomatic presentation. Visualisation resulted in referral for suspected malignancy for 18% of those examined (95% confidence interval = 5% to 40%). Very few ( Conclusion The sensitivity of cervical examination to detect cancer is very low, highlighting the need for better triage tools for primary care. Until such tools are identified GPs should continue to consider cervical cancer when symptoms persist and the cervix is not obviously abnormal on clinical examination. Further research on additional triage tools such as cervical cytology used as a diagnostic aid is needed urgently.