Neonatal Hearing Rescreening in a Second-Level Hospital: Problems and Solutions.

Second-level hospitals face peculiarities that make it difficult to implement hearing rescreening protocols, which is also common in other settings. This study analyzes the hearing rescreening process in these kinds of hospitals. A total of 1130 individuals were included; in this cohort, 61.07% were hospital newborns who failed their first otoacoustic emission test after birth (n = 679) or were unable to perform the test (n = 11), and who were then referred to an outpatient clinic. The remaining 38.93% were individuals born in another hospital with their first test conducted in the outpatient clinic (n = 440). A high number of rescreenings were made outside of the recommended time frame, mainly in children referred from another hospital. There was a high lost-to-follow-up rate, especially regarding otolaryngologist referrals. Neonatal hearing screening at second-level hospitals is difficult because of staffing and time constraints. This results in turnaround times that are longer than recommended, interfering with the timely detection of hearing loss. This is particularly serious in outpatient children with impaired screening. Referral to out-of-town centers leads to unacceptable follow-up loss. Legislative support for all these rescreening issues is necessary. In this article, these findings are discussed and some solutions are proposed.

Prostate cancer incidence in men with prostate-specific antigen below 3 ng/mL: The Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer.

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer (PCa) can reduce PCa mortality, but also involves overdetection of low-risk disease with potential adverse effects. We evaluated PCa incidence among men with PSA below 3 ng/mL and no PCa diagnosis at the first screening round of the Finnish Randomized Study of Screening for PCa. Follow-up started at the first screening attendance and ended at PCa diagnosis, emigration, death or the common closing date (December 2016), whichever came first. Cox regression analysis was used to estimate hazard ratios and their confidence intervals (CI). Among men with PSA <3 ng/mL, cumulative PCa incidence was 9.1% after 17.6 years median follow-up. Cumulative incidence was 3.6% among men with baseline PSA 0 to 0.99 ng/mL, 11.5% in those with PSA 1.0 to 1.99 ng/mL and 25.7% among men with PSA 2 to 2.99 ng/mL (hazard ratio 9.0, 95% CI: 7.9-10.2 for the latter). The differences by PSA level were most striking for low-risk disease based on Gleason score and EAU risk group. PSA values <1 ng/mL indicate a very low 20-year risk, while at PSA 2 to 2.99 ng/mL risks are materially higher, with 4- to 5-fold risk for aggressive disease. Using risk-stratification and appropriate rescreening intervals will reduce screening intensity and overdetection. Using cumulative incidence of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) as the criterion, rescreening intervals could range from approximately 3 years for men with initial PSA 2 to 2.99 ng/mL, 6 years for men with PSA 1 to 1.99 ng/mL to 10 years for men with PSA <1 ng/mL.

BestCyte® Cell Sorter Imaging System: Primary and adjudicative whole slide image rescreening review times of 500 ThinPrep Pap test thin-layers - An intra-observer, time-surrogate analysis of diagnostic confidence potentialities.

Background: The novel Artificial Intelligence-driven BestCyte® Cell Sorter Imaging System (BestCyte) enables hybrid digital screening through classification and sorting of tiles depicting cells in 8 galleries or whole slide image (WSI) reviews. Objectives: (1) Analyze expenditures of time (minutes) for primary BestCyte cell sorter screening and adjudicative WSI rescreening of 500 blinded, randomized ThinPrep thin-layers to determine review times per Bethesda nomenclature; (2) Analyze review times for NILM qualifier diagnoses reflecting increasing interpretive complexity (i.e., Inflammation, Reactive/Repair, Bacterial cytolysis, Bacterial vaginosis, Atrophy, and Atrophic vaginitis); (3) Challenge accuracy of primary diagnoses (Downgraded, Upheld, and Upgraded) following adjudicative WSI rescreening to assess correlated review times as surrogate indicators of diagnostic confidence in BestCyte functionality (i.e., learning curve); and (4) Correlate primary and adjudicative diagnoses to calculate intra-observer reproducibility Kappa coefficients per Bethesda nomenclature. Results: Of 500 thin-layers, the mean [primary/adjudicative rescreening review times (minutes)] were: Overall study [1.38/3.94], NILM [1.23/3.02], ASCUS [1.18/2.53], ASC-H [1.73/4.86], AGUS [1.84/6.34], LSIL [1.49/4.16], HSIL [1.52/4.10], CA [0.65/2.57]. Of 500 primary Bethesda diagnoses: 2 (0.40%) downgraded; 483 (96.6%) upheld; 15 (3.00%) upgraded after adjudicative WSI rescreening. Of 354 NILM diagnoses: 0 downgraded; 344 (97.2%) upheld; 10 (2.82%) upgraded. Of 34 ASCUS diagnoses: 2 (5.88%) downgraded; 28 (82.4%) upheld; 4 (11.8%) upgraded. Of 17 ASC-H diagnoses: 0 downgraded; 16 (94.1%) upheld; 1 (5.88%) upgraded. Of AGUS (n=1), LSIL (n=24), HSIL (n=52), CA (n=1), UNSAT (n=17): 100% upheld. Kappa coefficients with 95% (Confidence Intervals): Overall study 0.9305 (0.8983-0.9627), NILM 0.9429 (0.9110-0.9748), ASCUS 0.8378 (0.7393-0.9363), ASC-H 0.9112 (0.8113-0.9999), AGUS 1.0 (1.0-1.0), LSIL 0.9189 (0.8400-0.9978), HSIL 0.9894 (0.9685-0.9999), CA 1.0 (1.0-1.0), UNSAT 1.0 (1.0-1.0). Primary BestCyte cell image review time trends for NILM, ASCUS, LSIL, and HSIL, revealed plateaus relative to decreasing respective adjudicative WSI rescreening times. Conclusions: Given innovative robustness, BestCyte accommodates interpretive fundamentals, enabling shorter ThinPrep thin-layer review times with optimal intra-observer concordance per Bethesda nomenclature through classifying, ranking, sorting, and displaying clinically relevant cells efficiently in galleries. BestCyte fosters continuously optimizing diagnostic confidence learning curves; may supplant manual microscopy for primary screening.

The impact of breast density notification on rescreening rates within a population-based mammographic screening program.

BACKGROUND: High participation in mammographic screening is essential for its effectiveness to detect breast cancers early and thereby, improve breast cancer outcomes. Breast density is a strong predictor of breast cancer risk and significantly reduces the sensitivity of mammography to detect the disease. There are increasing mandates for routine breast density notification within mammographic screening programs. It is unknown if breast density notification impacts the likelihood of women returning to screening when next due (i.e. rescreening rates). This study investigates the association between breast density notification and rescreening rates using individual-level data from BreastScreen Western Australia (WA), a population-based mammographic screening program. METHODS: We examined 981,705 screening events from 311,656 women aged 40+ who attended BreastScreen WA between 2008 and 2017. Mixed effect logistic regression was used to investigate the association between rescreening and breast density notification status. RESULTS: Results were stratified by age (younger, targeted, older) and screening round (first, second, third+). Targeted women screening for the first time were more likely to return to screening if notified as having dense breasts (Percentunadjusted notified vs. not-notified: 57.8% vs. 56.1%; Padjusted = 0.016). Younger women were less likely to rescreen if notified, regardless of screening round (all P < 0.001). There was no association between notification and rescreening in older women (all P > 0.72). CONCLUSIONS: Breast density notification does not deter women in the targeted age range from rescreening but could potentially deter younger women from rescreening. These results suggest that all breast density notification messaging should include information regarding the importance of regular mammographic screening to manage breast cancer risk, particularly for younger women. These results will directly inform BreastScreen programs in Australia as well as other population-based screening providers outside Australia who notify women about breast density or are considering implementing breast density notification.

Congenital syphilis: Missed opportunities and the case for rescreening during pregnancy and at delivery.

Two infants treated for syphilis born to at risk mothers who screened negative at their first prenatal visit but were not rescreened at delivery are described. The first presented with classic, but unrecognized, features of congenital syphilis. In the second case, possible early maternal syphilis was diagnosed soon after delivery using the treponemal first reverse-screening algorithm. Although the child's physical exam was normal and the maternal rapid plasma reagin (RPR) negative, the child was treated for syphilis because maternal confirmatory treponemal tests suggested recent seroconversion. Given the re-emergence of congenital syphilis, our report aims to demonstrate the importance of rescreening women at increased risk and improve awareness of common manifestations of the syphilis disease in the newborn. For women at increased risk, repeat syphilis testing early in the third trimester and again at delivery in communities and populations with a high prevalence of syphilis is recommended.

Preventing early-onset group B streptococcal sepsis: is there a role for rescreening near term?

Objective: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2010 guidelines recommend group B streptococcus (GBS) screening at 35-37-week gestation to identify women with positive cultures who should receive intrapartum antibiotics and notes that the predictive value of a negative culture declines after 5 weeks. However, despite the lack of evidence, current guidelines do not recommend rescreening for those screened between 35 and 37 weeks. Our objectives were to investigate the rate of conversion from negative to positive results in women rescreened after appropriate screening at 35-37-week gestation and to examine the impact of rescreening on the use of intrapartum antibiotics. Additionally, we examined cases of early-onset group B streptococcal sepsis (early-onset GBS) in term neonates.Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of women delivering liveborn infants 1 January, 2010-31 December, 2014 in Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Data were obtained from database extraction and chart review.Results: We identified 135,585 women with GBS screening at 35-37-week gestation; 4511 (3.3%) women were rescreened. Of the 3860 (85.6%) initially screened negative, 218 (5.6%) converted to positive. Fewer women in the discordant negative to positive group received GBS prophylaxis prior to delivery compared with women with a single positive culture (65.9 versus 92.3%, p < .001). In the discordant negative to positive group, results were available at the time of delivery in 133 of 217 subjects (61.3%). There were 18 cases of early-onset GBS at term (0.10 per 1000 livebirths); the majority of cases occurred among women with negative screening.Conclusion: Our results provide support for the current CDC recommendation against rescreening near term for those women already screened at 35-37-week gestation given the low rate of conversion from negative to positive, and the extremely low rate of early-onset GBS in the screened population.

Patterns of participation over four rounds of annual fecal immunochemical test-based screening for colorectal cancer: what predicts rescreening?

BACKGROUND: Participation at the recommended intervals is critical for screening to be effective in reducing colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence. This study describes patterns of screening participation over four rounds of fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) to identify whether demographic variables and prior screening satisfaction are significantly associated with patterns of re-participation. METHODS: Baseline surveys were mailed to 4000 South Australians randomly selected from the electoral-roll. Respondents (n = 1928/48.2%) were offered four annual FIT rounds. Screening participation and satisfaction at each round were recorded. RESULTS: Study participation was 58.5, 66.9, 73.1 and 71.4% respectively over four rounds. Three participation patterns were described: consistent participation (43.1%), consistent non-participation (26.4%) and inconsistent participation (changeable; 30.5%), including intermittent and sustained change patterns. Sustained change described those who changed participatory behavior and then maintained for at least two rounds (n = 375/19.5%). Older people, and those not working were most likely to sustain participation. Younger invitees, especially men, were more likely to change participatory behavior and sustain the change. People with higher disadvantage, less education, not working and with no prior (pre-trial) screening experience were more likely to start participating and drop out. People dissatisfied with a prior screening test, including finding aspects embarrassing or unpleasant, were also more likely not to participate in annual screening or to drop out. CONCLUSIONS: The findings identify those at risk of non- or inconsistent participation in rescreening. They should aid targeting of interventions for demographic groups at risk and ensuring screening experiences are not perceived as unpleasant or difficult.

Deafness Gene Screening and AABR in Children Hearing Loss Diagnose / 听力学及言语疾病杂志

Objective The aim of this study was to find out the carrying rate and the type of mutation of children deafness gene and discuss the significance of combined screening of deafness gene and hearing screening.Methods From October 2015 to December 2016,a total of 505 children from primary screening institutions were done with AABR hearing re-screening and deafness gene through blood filter paper by heel for gene sequencing at the hearing screening clinic of Hefei Maternal and Child Health Hospital.The 9 mutation sites of deafness genes included GJB2 (235delC,299delAT,176del16,35delG),GJB3 (538C＞T),SLC26A4 (IVS7-2A＞G,2168A＞G) and mitochondrial 12SrRNA (1555A＞G,1494C＞T).Results There were 69 children with deafness susceptibility genes in 505 cases and its overall carrying rate was 13.7％.There were 56 cases (81.16％)with GJB2 gene mutations,10 cases (14.49％) with SLC26A4 gene mutations,and 3 patients (4.35％) with mitochondrial 12SrRNA gene mutations.GJB3 gene mutations wer not detected.There were 376 who failed AABR rescreening out of 505.The total failure rate for AABR rescreening was 74.46％.Thirty-seven cases were examined with ABR out of 69 cases with deafness gene abnormal.32 cases (86.49％) had different degrees of hearing impairment.Conclusion GJB2 gene mutation was the highest carrying rate of deafness genes in this region,followed by SLC26A4 gene,less mitochondrial 12SrRNA gene mutations while GJB3 gene mutations was not detected.Hereditary deafness gene screening was a valid supplement for physical screening,the combination of both methods was helpful for early detection and intervention of deaf children.

Pap smears with glandular cell abnormalities: Are they detected by rapid prescreening?

BACKGROUND: Rapid prescreening (RPS) is one of the quality assurance (QA) methods used in gynecologic cytology. The efficacy of RPS has been previously studied but mostly with respect to squamous lesions; in fact, there has been no study so far specifically looking at the sensitivity of RPS for detecting glandular cell abnormalities. METHODS: A total of 80,565 Papanicolaou (Pap) smears underwent RPS during a 25-month period. A sample was designated as "review for abnormality" (R) if any abnormal cells (at the threshold of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance/atypical glandular cells [AGC]) were thought to be present or was designated as negative (N) if none were detected. Each sample then underwent full screening (FS) and was designated as either R or N and also given a cytologic interpretation. RESULTS: The final cytologic interpretation was a glandular cell abnormality (≥AGC) in 107 samples (0.13%); 39 of these (36.4%) were flagged as R on RPS. Twenty-four patients (33.8%) out of 71 who had histologic follow-up were found to harbor a high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or carcinoma; 13 of those 24 Pap smears (54.2%) had been flagged as R on RPS. Notably, 11 AGC cases were picked up by RPS only and not by FS and represented false-negative cases; 2 of these showed endometrial adenocarcinoma on histologic follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Pap smears with glandular cell abnormalities are often flagged as abnormal by RPS, and this results in a sensitivity of 36.4% (at the AGC threshold). Most importantly, some cases of AGC are detected on Pap smears by RPS only, and this demonstrates that RPS is a valuable QA method.

Evaluation of TSH Levels in the Program of Congenital Hypothyroidism Newborn Screening in a Pilot Study of Preterm Newborns in Bogotá, Colombia

Abstract Introduction: Preterm infants (<37 weeks of gestation) have low levels of thyroid hormones due to multiple factors. Objective: To evaluate levels of thyroid-stimulation hormone (TSH) in the program congenital hypothyroidism (CH) newborn screening in a sample of preterm infants in the city of Bogotá, Colombia. Methods: The Secretaría de Salud Distrital screening protocol for CH (blood sample is collected from the umbilical cord in all the newborns) remeasured the serum TSH and heel TSH when preterm infants completed 37 weeks of gestation. Results: A total of 59 preterm neonates were rescreened, of which 2 neonates had elevated levels of TSH and 1 neonate had transient hypothyroxinemia. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov 2-sample/bilateral statistical test was used to compare the neonatal TSH levels of preterm and full-term newborns, which do not follow the same distribution. Conclusion: In our pilot study, 2 of the rescreened infants presented high levels of TSH and 1 had transient hyperthyrotropinemia, suggesting the need for rescreening of preterm infants. Additionally, a larger study should be performed to determine the screening cutoff values for preterm newborns.

Quantifying independent risk factors for failing to rescreen in a breast cancer screening program in Flanders, Belgium.

BACKGROUND: Mammographic screening may reduce breast cancer mortality by about 20%, provided participation is high and women screen regularly. We quantified independent risk factors for failing to rescreen and built a model to predict how rescreening rates change if these risk factors would be modified. METHODS: Multivariate analysis was used to analyze data from a prospective study which included a self-administered questionnaire and rescreening status 30months after a t0 mammogram, using a random sample of women 50-67years (Belgium 2010-2013). RESULTS: A false positive result at the most recent past mammogram (Odds Ratio=5.0, 95% Confidence Interval 3.6-6.8), an interval until new invitation greater than 25months (Odds Ratio=4.8 for >29months, 95% Confidence Interval 2.9-8.1), waiting times in the mammography unit >1h (Odds Ratio=2.1, 95% Confidence Interval 1.2-3.7) and difficulties in reaching the unit (Odds Ratio=2.5, 95% Confidence Interval 1.4-4.4) were the strongest independent predictors for failing to rescreen. The area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic analysis was 0.705 for the model development stage and 0.717 for the validation stage and goodness-of-fit was good. CONCLUSIONS: Maintaining an invitation cycle of maximum 25months, limiting waiting time in the mammography unit and lowering the number of false positives could increase breast cancer screening compliance.

Does total manual rescreening of negative pap tests screened by the ThinPrep imaging system add any value?

We compared the performance of utilizing the ThinPrep® Imaging System (TIS) according to the manufacturer's directions to screening with the TIS plus total manual rescreening in Pap tests that were initially diagnosed as NIL to determine whether manual rescreening decreases the false-negative rate for epithelial lesions. Three thousand three hundred forty cases were diagnosed as NIL on the 22 fields of view selected by the TIS and subsequently manually rescreened by the same cytotechnologist. Six hundred seventy-four cases were sent to a cytopathologist for final diagnosis based on review criteria. Biopsy follow-up and Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) test results were noted if available for cases with a diagnosis of ASCUS or above. Three thousand one hundred fifty-nine (94.6%) were confirmed NIL and 181 cases were diagnosed as abnormal on manual rescreen. There were 147 ASCUS, 6 ASCH, 9 AGC, 19 LSIL, and 0 HSIL cases. The overall false-negative rate of screening for atypia/SIL with the TIS was 5.4%. Of the 147 cases with HPV results, 43 (29%) were positive. Only 1 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 was found on biopsy follow-up, in a case of ASCUS with a positive HPV. Based on our data, the TIS for screening of Pap tests is reliable in NIL cases as compared to total manual rescreening. The majority of the false-negative cases were diagnosed as ASCUS on subsequent review, with 0 HSIL cases. Our results confirm that the TIS is highly accurate in excluding HSIL, negating the need for total manual rescreening of NIL Pap tests.

Is out-of-pocket cost a barrier to receiving repeat tests for chlamydia and gonorrhoea?

We aimed to examine whether out-of-pocket (OOP) costs associated with chlamydia (CT) and gonorrhoea (GC) screening tests is a barrier to receiving CT/GC re-screening and follow-up annual screening. A major health insurance claims database 2006-2010 was used for analysis. The date of first CT/GC diagnosis was used as the index date, and OOP costs at index date for screening tests were retrieved. A re-screening test and an annual screening were defined as tests that occurred within 90-180 days and 181-395 days of the index date, respectively. Re-screening rates were 11.7% and 10.9% and annual screening rates were 24.7% and 23.7% for CT and GC cases, respectively. Compared with the CT patients without OOP expenses, those with OOP expenses of $30 or higher had significantly reduced likelihood of receiving re-screening and annual screening. Similar results were found for GC patients. We concluded that OOP costs serve as a significant barrier to re-screening and annual screening.

Factors associated with Receiving Rescreening in High Risk Group Diagnosed by Endoscopic Screening of Stomach Cancer

BACKGROUND: Stomach cancer is the most common cancer in Korea. Lifelong health management program recommends that males over 40 years and women over 50 years should undergo stomach cancer screening by endoscopy or upper gastrointestinal series every two years. The importance of re-screening of stomach cancer in a high risk group is emphasized. METHODS: A telephone questionnaire was done one year after to 123 patients over 40 years old considered as a high risk group with either chronic atropic gastritis, intestinal metaplasia, gastric ulcer, gastric adenoma among 804 subjects who had undergone anendoscopic examination from February 2002 to June 2003 at a university hospital health promotion center. RESULTS: The number of patients who responded were 109. The average recognition rate of high risk group was 53.2%. The rate of recognition of high risk group was lower in good subjective health estimation group and in less educated group, in old age group, and in chronic atrophic gastritis and intestinal metaplasia group. The rate of not receiving re-screening after 1 year was 48 (44.0%). Re-screening rate in patients with intestinal metaplasia (35.3%) and chronic atropic gastritis (39.1%) compared to gastric ulcer (77.8%) and gastric polyp (90.0%), in those not recognizing themselves as high risk group, in low education group, in old age, was lower. CONCLUSION: In patients with chronic atropic gastritis and intestinal metaplasia, in those not recognizing themselves as high risk group, in old age and in good subjective health state. We need to educate the importance for regular screening of stomach cancer more intensively.

Quality Improvement Methods in Cervico-vaginal Cytology: Cytologic/Histologic Correlation vs. 10% Random Rescreening / 대한세포병리학회지

Although the success of the Papanicolaou test as a screening tool of cervical cancer is evident, there still exists 2-5% of discrepancy rate by both human and machine. To improve the qualilty of cervico-vaginal cytology, the authors compared cervicovaginal smear with cervical biopsy diagnoses, and analysed the causes of discrepancies. Among 30,922 cervicovaginal smears from June 1996 to April 1997 at our hospital, there were 271 cases of cervicovaginal smear with subsequent cervical punch or LEEP cone biopsies within several months. The biopsies and smears from a total of 98 discordant cases were reviewed. The discrepancy was attributed to sampling errors in 43 cases(43.9%), and to cytologic diagnosis in 49 cases(50.0%). Among these, 43 cases were interpretative errors(categories A;19, B;16 and C;8), whereas six cases were screening errors(categories B;2 and C;4). Among cervical biopsy cases, errors were present in four. As for 10% random rescreening, cytote chnologists reviewed 3,196 of 30,922 smears during the same period. There were 43 cases of screening error(categories A;27, B;16). Cytologic/histologic correlation was superior to 10% random rescreening of negative cases. The most effective method for quality improvement in cervicovaginal cytology was to implement both quality control(rescreening) and quality assurance(cytologic/histologic correlation) programs.