Temporal trends and regional disparities in cancer screening utilization: an observational Swiss claims-based study.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We examined colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer screening utilization in eligible populations within three data cross-sections, and identified factors potentially modifying cancer screening utilization in Swiss adults. METHODS: The study is based on health insurance claims data of the Helsana Group. The Helsana Group is one of the largest health insurers in Switzerland, insuring approximately 15% of the entire Swiss population across all regions and age groups. We assessed proportions of the eligible populations receiving colonoscopy/fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), mammography, or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing in the years 2014, 2016, and 2018, and calculated average marginal effects of individual, temporal, regional, insurance-, supply-, and system-related variables on testing utilization using logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 8.3% of the eligible population received colonoscopy/FOBT in 2014, 8.9% in 2016, and 9.2% in 2018. In these years, 20.9, 21.2, and 20.4% of the eligible female population received mammography, and 30.5, 31.1, and 31.8% of the eligible male population had PSA testing. Adjusted testing utilization varied little between 2014 and 2018; there was an increasing trend of 0.8% (0.6-1.0%) for colonoscopy/FOBT and of 0.5% (0.2-0.8%) for PSA testing, while mammography use decreased by 1.5% (1.2-1.7%). Generally, testing utilization was higher in French-speaking and Italian-speaking compared to German-speaking region for all screening types. Cantonal programs for breast cancer screening were associated with an increase of 7.1% in mammography utilization. In contrast, a high density of relevant specialist physicians showed null or even negative associations with screening utilization. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in cancer screening utilization was modest over time, but considerable between regions. Regional variation was highest for mammography use where recommendations are debated most controversially, and the implementation of programs differed the most.