RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer patients in Colombia have a lower likelihood of survival compared to breast cancer patients. In 1993, Colombia enrolled citizens in one of two health insurance regimes (contributory-private insurance and subsidized- public insurance) with fewer benefits in the subsidized regime. In 2008, the Constitutional Court required the Colombian government to unify services of both regimes by 2012. This study evaluated the impact of this insurance change on cervical cancer mortality before and after 2012. METHODS: We accessed 24,491 cervical cancer mortality records for 2006-2020 from the vital statistics of Colombia's National Administrative Department of Statistics (DANE). We calculated crude mortality rates by health insurance type and departments (geopolitical division). Changes by department were analyzed by rate differences between 2006 and 2012 and 2013-2020, for each health insurance type. We analyzed trends using join-point regressions by health insurance and the two time-periods. RESULTS: The contributory regime (private insurance) exhibited a significant decline in cervical cancer mortality from 2006 to 2012, characterized by a noteworthy average annual percentage change (AAPC) of -3.27% (P = 0.02; 95% CI [-5.81, -0.65]), followed by a marginal non-significant increase from 2013 to 2020 (AAPC 0.08%; P = 0.92; 95% CI [-1.63, 1.82]). In the subsidized regime (public insurance), there is a non-significant decrease in mortality between 2006 and 2012 (AAPC - 0.29%; P = 0.76; 95% CI [-2.17, 1.62]), followed by a significant increase from 2013 to 2020 (AAPC of 2.28%; P < 0.001; 95% CI [1.21, 3.36]). Examining departments from 2013 to 2020 versus 2006 to 2012, the subsidized regime showed fewer cervical cancer-related deaths in 5 out of 32 departments, while 6 departments had higher mortality. In 21 departments, mortality rates remained similar between both regimes. CONCLUSION: Improvement of health benefits of the subsidized regime did not show a positive impact on cervical cancer mortality in women enrolled in this health insurance scheme, possibly due to unresolved administrative and socioeconomic barriers that hinder access to quality cancer screening and treatment.