PDF herunterladen
CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2017; 39(09): 480-487
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1604481
Original Article
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Regional and Socioeconomic Differences in the Coverage of the Papanicolau Test in Brazil: Data from the Brazilian Health Survey 2013

Diferenças regionais e socioeconômicas na cobertura do exame Papanicolau no Brasil: Dados da Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde 2013
Isabelle Ribeiro Barbosa
1   Collective Health, Faculdade de Ciências da Saúde do Trairi, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Santa Cruz, RN, Brazil
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

21. Januar 2017

23. Mai 2017

Publikationsdatum:
07. August 2017 (online)

  Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the coverage of the Papanicolaou test in Brazil and the associated factors.

Methods Cross-sectional study based on data from the Brazilian Health Survey 2013 comprising the proportion of 25- to 64-year-old women who had undergone a Papanicolaou test within the previous 3 years, categorized by sociodemographic variables and access to healthcare services.

Results The screening coverage in Brazil was of 79.4% (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 78.4–80.3), showing significant differences between the different states of the country, with the highest rate in the state of Roraima (86.5; 95%CI: 83.5–89.4), and the lowest one in the state of Maranhão (67.7; 95%CI: 61.3–74.0). Undergoing the test was significantly more frequent among married women (83.6%; 95%CI: 82.4–84.8), those with higher educational levels (88.7%; 95%CI: 87.0–90.5), of white ethnicity (82.6%; 95%CI: 81.3–83.9) and who reside in urban areas (80.1%; 95%CI: 79.1–81.2). Those who had undergone the test more than three years prior to the survey and the ones who had never undergone it were associated with a lower level of education, being of black or brown ethnicity, single or divorced, and rural dwellers.

Conclusions The coverage of cervical cancer screening in Brazil is below the recommended rate and presents regional and sociodemographic disparities.

Resumo

Objetivo Avaliar a cobertura do exame Papanicolau no Brasil e os fatores associados.

Métodos Estudo transversal a partir dos dados da Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde 2013 relativos à proporção de mulheres de 25 a 64 anos que realizaram pelo menos um exame Papanicolau nos últimos 3 anos, categorizados por variáveis sociodemográficas e de acesso aos serviços de saúde.

Resultados A cobertura do rastreio foi de 79,4% no Brasil (intervalo de confiança de 95% [IC95%]: 78,4–80,3), com diferença significativa entre as unidades federativas, sendo maior no estado de Roraima (86,5%; IC95%: 83,5–89,4) e menor no Maranhão (67,7%; IC95%: 61,3–74,0). A realização do exame foi significativamente maior entre as mulheres casadas (83,6%; IC 95%: 82,4–84,8), com nível de instrução mais elevado (88,7%; IC95%: 87,0–90,5), de etnia branca (82,6%; IC95%: 81,3–83,9), e que residem em área urbana (80,1%; IC95%: 79,1–81,2). As que realizaram o exame havia mais de 3 anos e as que nunca realizaram estiveram associadas a menor nível de instrução, a mulheres negras e pardas, a ser solteira ou separada, e a moradoras de área rural.

Conclusões A cobertura do rastreio para o câncer e colo de útero no Brasil tem proporção abaixo da recomendada, e apresenta disparidades regionais e sociodemográficas.

Keywords

papanicolaou test - cervical neoplasms - women's health - early detection of cancer - inequalities in health - epidemiology

Palavras-chave

teste de Papanicolau - neoplasias do colo do útero - saúde da mulher - detecção precoce de câncer - desigualdades em saúde - epidemiologia
 

  • References

  • 1 Singh GK, Azuine RE, Siahpush M. Global inequalities in cervical cancer incidence and mortality are linked to deprivation, low socioeconomic status, and human development. Int J MCH AIDS 2012; 1 (01) 17-30
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Barbosa IR, Souza DLB, Bernal MM, Costa IdoC. Regional inequalities in cervical cancer mortality in Brazil: trends and projections through to 2030. Cien Saude Colet 2016; 21 (01) 253-262
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Tsu V, Jerónimo J. Saving the world's women from cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 2016; 374 (26) 2509-2511
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Manica ST, Drachler MdeL, Teixeira LB. , et al. Socioeconomic and regional inequalities of pap smear coverage. Rev Gaucha Enferm 2016; 37 (01) e52287
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Falcão GB, Ibiapina FLP, Feitosa HN. , et al. Fatores associados à realização de citologia para prevenção de câncer do colo uterino em uma comunidade urbana de baixa renda. Cad Saude Colet 2014; 22 (02) 165-172
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Simard EP, Naishadham D, Saslow D, Jemal A. Age-specific trends in black-white disparities in cervical cancer incidence in the United States: 1975-2009. Gynecol Oncol 2012; 127 (03) 611-615
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Saslow D, Solomon D, Lawson HW. , et al; ACS-ASCCP-ASCP Cervical Cancer Guideline Committee. American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 2012; 62 (03) 147-172
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Brasil. Instituto Nacional de Câncer José Alencar Gomes da Silva. Coordenação de Prevenção e Vigilância. Divisão de Detecção Precoce e Apoio à Organização de Rede. Diretrizes brasileiras para o rastreamento do câncer do colo do útero. Rio de Janeiro: INCA; 2016
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 9 World Health Organization. WHO guidelines for screening and treatment of precancerous lesions for cervical cancer prevention. Geneva: WHO; 2013
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Vale DBAP, Morais SS, Pimenta AL, Zeferino LC. Assessment of the cervical cancer screening in the Family Health Strategy in Amparo, São Paulo State, Brazil. Cad Saude Publica 2010; 26 (02) 383-390
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Ribeiro L, Bastos RR, Vieira MdeT, Ribeiro LC, Teixeira MTB, Leite ICG. Opportunistic screening versus missed opportunities: non-adherence to Pap smear testing in women attending prenatal care. Cad Saude Publica 2016; 32 (06) e00001415
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Girianelli VR, Gamarra CJ, Azevedo e Silva G. Disparities in cervical and breast cancer mortality in Brazil. Rev Saude Publica 2014; 48 (03) 459-467
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Navarro C, Fonseca AJ, Sibajev A. , et al. Cervical cancer screening coverage in a high-incidence region. Rev Saude Publica 2015; 49: 17
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Sousa AMV, Teixeira CCA, Medeiros SD. , et al. [Cervical cancer mortality in the state of Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil, 1996-2010: time trends and projections up to 2030]. Epidemiol Serv Saude 2016; 25 (02) 311-322 Portuguese
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística [Internet]. Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde: 2013: acesso e utilização dos serviços de saúde, acidentes e violências: Brasil, grandes regiões e unidades da federação. Rio de Janeiro: IBGE; 2015. [cited 2016 Jan 12]. Available from: http://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/visualizacao/livros/liv94074.pdf
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Souza-Júnior PRB, Freitas MPS, Antonaci GA, Szwarcwald CL. Desenho da amostra da Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde 2013. Epidemiol Serv Saúde. 2015; 24 (02) 207-216
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Damacena GN, Szwarcwald CL, Malta DC. , et al. O processo de desenvolvimento da Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde no Brasil, 2013. Epidemiol Serv Saúde. 2015; 24 (02) 197-206
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Martins LFL, Thuler LCS, Valente JG. [Coverage of the Pap smear in Brazil and its determining factors: a systematic literature review]. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2005; 27 (08) 485-492 Portuguese
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Gasperin SI, Boing AF, Kupek E. Cervical cancer screening coverage and associated factors in a city in southern Brazil: a population-based study. Cad Saude Publica 2011; 27 (07) 1312-1322
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 20 Ozawa C, Marcopito LF. [Papanicolaou smear screening: coverage in two home surveys applied in the city of São Paulo in 1987 and 2001-2002]. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2011; 33 (05) 238-245 Portuguese
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 Novaes HMD, Braga PE, Schout D. Fatores associados à realização de exames preventivos para câncer nas mulheres brasileiras, PNAD 2003. Cien Saude Colet 2006; 11 (04) 1023-1035
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 22 Forouzanfar MH, Foreman KJ, Delossantos AM. , et al. Breast and cervical cancer in 187 countries between 1980 and 2010: a systematic analysis. Lancet 2011; 378 (9801): 1461-1484
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 23 Brito-Silva K, Bezerra AFB, Chaves LDP, Tanaka OY. Integrality in cervical cancer care: evaluation of access. Rev Saude Publica 2014; 48 (02) 240-248
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 24 Diniz AS, Xavier MB, Braga PP, Guimarães EAA. Assistência à saúde da mulher na atenção primária: prevenção do câncer do colo do útero. Rev APS. 2014; 16 (03) 333-337
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 25 Tomasi E, Oliveira TF, Fernandes PAA. , et al. Structure and work process in the prevention of cervical cancer in Health Basic Attention in Brazil: Program for the Improvement of Access and Quality. Rev Bras Saude Mater Infant 2015; 15 (02) 171-180
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 26 Gamarra CJ, Valente JG, Azevedo e Silva G. Magnitude of mortality from cervical cancer in the Brazilian Northeast and socioeconomic factors. Rev Panam Salud Publica 2010; 28 (02) 100-106
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 27 Albuquerque KM, Frias PG, Andrade CLT, Aquino EML, Menezes G, Szwarcwald CL. Pap smear coverage and factors associated with non-participation in cervical cancer screening: an analysis of the Cervical Cancer Prevention Program in Pernambuco State, Brazil. Cad Saude Publica 2009; 25 (Suppl. 02) S301-S309
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 28 Borges MFSO, Dotto LMG, Koifman RJ, Cunha MdeA, Muniz PT. Prevalence of uterine cervical cancer testing in Rio Branco, Acre State, Brazil, and factors associated with non-participation in screening. Cad Saude Publica 2012; 28 (06) 1156-1166
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 29 Müller EV, Biazevic MGH, Antunes JLF, Crosato EM. Socioeconomic trends and differentials in mortality due to cervical cancer in the State of Paraná (Brazil), 1980-2000. Cien Saude Colet 2011; 16 (05) 2495-2500
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 30 Arrossi S, Ramos S, Paolino M, Sankaranarayanan R. Social inequality in Pap smear coverage: identifying under-users of cervical cancer screening in Argentina. Reprod Health Matters 2008; 16 (32) 50-58
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 31 Lage AC, Pessoa MC, Velásquez Meléndez JG. Fatores associados à não realização do Teste de Papanicolaou em Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, 2008. Rev Min Enferm. 2013; 17 (03) 565-576
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar