1819 | Conformidade na mamografia realizada na atenção primária à saúde em São Paulo. | Autores: Carla Andréia Vilanova Marques (deiavilanova@hotmail.com) (UNIFESP / INCA) ; Maria Gaby Rivero de Gutiérrez (UNIFESP) ; Elisabeth Níglio de Figueiredo (UNIFESP) |
Resumo: Objetivo: Comparar o perfil socioeconômico, a frequência, a cobertura e a conformidade da mamografia (MMG) com a normativa ministerial, segundo o modelo de UBS. Método: Estudo transversal realizado de outubro a dezembro de 2013. Empregou-se amostragem por conglomerado em dois estágios. Em 17 UBS Tradicionais, 11 Estratégia Saúde da Família (ESF) e 10 Mistas (n=38) selecionadas foi aplicado questionário validado a 950 usuárias entre 35 a 69 anos. Realizou-se análise descritiva e o teste qui-quadrado (p= 0,05) para a variável resposta MMG. Resultado: frequência maior deste exame ocorreu na UBS Tradicional (59,9%) e menor na ESF (53,1%). Evidenciou-se maior cobertura mamográfica bienal em mulheres entre 50-69 anos na UBS Tradicional (12,3%) e menor na Mista (10,2%), sendo a conformidade à recomendação governamental maior na ESF (29%) do que nas UBS Mista (22,9%) e Tradicional (21,2%). O tempo médio entre a requisição da MMG e retorno com profissional foi maior na UBS Tradicional e ESF (6 meses) em relação ao serviço Misto (4 meses). Conclusão: UBS Tradicionais ofertaram mais mamografia, porém maior conformidade ao recomendado ocorreu na ESF, sendo estes valores muito inferior aos 70% estabelecido o que aponta para inconsistências nesta prática preventiva.
Referências: 1. Maeseneer JD, Moosa S, Pongsupap Y, Kaufman A. Primary health care in a changing world. Br J Gen Pract[Internet]. 2008 Nov [cited 2017 Feb 10];58(556):806-9. Available from: http://bjgp.org/content/58/556/806.long 2. White F. Primary health care and public health: foundations of universal health systems. Med Princ Pract [Internet]. 2015 Jan 9 [cited 2017 Feb 11];24:103-16. Available from: https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/370197 3. Ramírez NA, Giovanella L, Romero RV, Silva HT, Almeida PF, Ríos G, et al. Mapping primary health care renewal in South America. Fam Pract [Internet]. 2016 Mar [cited 2017 Feb. 10];33(3):261-7. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmw013 4. Ginsburg O, Bray F, Coleman MP, Vanderpuye V, Eniu A, Kotha SR, et al. The global burden of women´s cancers: a grand challenge in global health. Lancet [Internet]. 2016 Nov 1 [cited 2017 Feb 12]. Available from: 10.1016/S014-6736(16)31392-7. 5. Pace LE, Keating NLA. A systematic assessment of benefits and risk to guide breast cancer screening decisions. JAMA [Internet]. 2014 Apr 2 [cited 2017 Feb 12];66(3):1327-33. Available from: http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/1853165 6. Dowling EC, Klabunde C, Patnick J, Ballard-Barbash R, International Cancer Screening Network (ICSN). Breast and cervical cancer screening programme implementation in 16 countries. J Med Screen [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2017 Feb 10];17(3):139-46. Available from: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1258/jms.2010.010033 7. Rubin G, Berendsen A, Crawford SM, Dommett R, Earle C, Emery J, et al. The expanding role of primary care in cancer control. Lancet Oncol [Internet]. 2015 Sep [cited 2016 Dec 15];16(12):1231-72. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470204515002053 8. Marques CAV, Figueiredo EM, Gutiérrez MGR. [Public health policies for breast cancer control in Brazil]. Rev Enferm UERJ [Internet]. 2015 Mar-Apr [citado 2017 Feb 09];23(2):272-8. Available from: http://www.facenf.uerj.br/v23n2/v23n2a21.pdf Portuguese. 9. Sala A, Luppi CG, Simões O, Marsiglia RG. [Integrality and Primary Health Care: assessment in the perspective of health services users in the city of São Paulo]. Saude Soc [Internet]. 2011 Dec [cited 2017 Feb 12];20(4):948-60. Available from: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-12902011000400012&lng=en. Portuguese. 10. Escorel S, Giovanella L, Mendonça MHM, Senna MCM. [The Family Health Program and the construction of a new model for primary care in Brazil]. Rev Panam Salud Publica [Internet]. 2007 [cited 2017 Feb 12];21(2-3):164-76. Available from: http://www.scielosp.org/pdf/rpsp/v21n2-3/11.pdf Portuguese. 11. Macinko J, Harris MJ. Brazil´s Family Health Strategy: delivering community-based primary care in a universal health system. N Engl J Med [internet] 2015 Jun 4 [cited 2017 Feb 11];372:2177-81. Available from: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1501140 12. Ferreira CW, Alves MCG, Cohn A, Kishima V, Junior AE, Gomes A, Bousquat A. Atenção básica em saúde: comparação entre programa saúde da família e unidade básica de saúde por estrato de exclusão social no município de São Paulo. Cienc Saude Coletiva [Internet]. 2006 Jul/Sep [cited 2017 Feb 11];11(3):633-41. Available from: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/csc/v11n3/30979.pdf 13. Lima-Costa MF, Turci MA, Macinko J. [A comparison of the Family Health Strategy to other sources of healthcare: utilization and quality of health services in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais State, Brazil]. Cad Saude Publica [Internet]. 2013 Jul [cited 2017 Feb 11], 29(7):1370-80. Available from: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/csp/v29n7/11.pdf Portuguese. 14. Liedke PE, Finkelstein DM, Szmonifka J, Barrios CH, Chavarri-Guerra Y, Bines J, et al. Outcomes of breast cancer in Brazil related to health care coverage: a retrospective cohort study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev [Internet]. 2014 Jan [cited 2017 Feb 10];23(1):126-33. Available from: http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/23/1/126.long 15. Leite FM, Amorim MH, Marques GM, Vilela AP. [Family Health Strategy and Screeening for breast cancer]. Espaço Saude: Rev Saude Publica Parana [Internet]. 2011 Jun [cited 2017 Feb 12];12(2):1-9. Available from: http://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/espacoparasaude/article/view/9170/pdf Portuguese. 16. Barreto AS, Mendes MF, Thuler LC. [Evaluation of a strategy adopted to expand adherence to breast cancer screening in Brazilian Northeast]. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet [Internet]. 2012 Jan-Feb [cited 2017 Jan 29];34(2):86-91. Available from: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbgo/v34n2/a08v34n2.pdf Portuguese. 17. Batiston AP. [Early detection of breast cancer: knowledge and practice of women and professionals of the Family Health Strategy in Dourados/MS]. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet [Internet]. 2010 Feb [cited 2017 Feb 11];32(2):99. Available from: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbgo/v32n2/v32n2a10.pdf Portuguese. 18. Bushatsky M, Lima KD, Moraes LX, Gusmão LTB, Barros MBSC, Figueira Filho ASS. [Breast cancer: prevention of shares in primary health care]. Rev Enferm UFPE online [Internet]. 2014 Oct [cited 2017 Feb 12];8(10):3429-36. Available from: http://www.revista.ufpe.br/revistaenfermagem/index.php/revista/article/view/5798/pdf_6285 Portuguese. 19. Szwarcwald CL, Damacena GN. Complex sampling design in population surveys: planning and effects on statistical data analysis. Rev. bras. epidemiol. [online]. 2008; 11 (suppl.1):38-45. Available from: . 20. Marques CA, Figueiredo EM, Gutiérrez MG. [Validation of an instrument to identify actions for screening and detection of breast cancer]. Acta Paul Enferm [Internet] 2015 [cited 2017 Feb 9];28(2):183-9. Available from: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/ape/v28n2/1982-0194-ape-28-02-0183.pdf Portuguese. 21. Silva LA, Casotti CA, Chaves SCL. Brazilian scientific production on the Family Health Strategy and the change in the model of care. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2013; 18(1):221-32. Available from: . ISSN 1413-8123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1413-81232013000100023. 22. Costa NR. The Family Health Strategy: primary health care and the challenge of Brazilian metropolises. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2016;21(5):1389-98. Available from: . ISSN 1413-8123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232015215.24842015. 23. Arantes LJ, Shimizu HE, Hamann EM. The benefits and challenges of the Family Health Strategy in Brazilian Primary Health Care: a literature review. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2016;21(5):1499-1509. Available from: . ISSN 1413-8123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232015215.19602015. 24. Silva ZP, Ribeiro MCSA, Barata RB, Almeida MF. Socio-demographic profile and utilization patterns of the public healthcare system (SUS), 2003- 2008. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2011;16(9):3807-16. 25. Schneider IJC, Gihel MWC, Boing AF, D´orsi El. [Mammogram screening for breast cancer and associated factors in the South of Brazil: a based-population survey]. Cad Saude Publica. 2014;30(9):1987-97. 26. Melo EC, Oliveira EX, Chor D, Carvalho MS, Pinheiro RS. Inequalities in socioeconomic status and race and the odds of undergoing a mammogram in Brazil. Int J Equity Health [Internet]. 2016 Sep [cited 2017 Jan 25];15:144. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5024478/pdf/12939_2016_Article_435.pdf 27. Theme Filha MM, Leal MC, Oliveira EF, Pereira AP, Gama SG. Regional and social inequalities in the performance of Pap test and screening mammography and their correlation with lifestyle: Brazilian national health survey, 2013. Int J Equity Health [Internet]. 2016 Nov [cited 2017 Feb 10];15(1):136-43. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5112710/pdf/12939_2016_Article_430.pdf 28. Anderson WF, Rosenberg PS, Prat A, Perou CM, Sherman ME. How many etiological subtypes of breast cancer: two, three, four, or more? Natl Cancer Inst [Internet]. 2014 Aug 12 [cited 2017 Feb 12];106(8). Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4148600/pdf/dju165.pdf 29. Lynge E, Tornberg S, Karsa L, Segnan N, Delden JJM. Determinants of successful implementation of population based cancer screening programmes. Eur J Cancer [Internet]. 2012 Mar [cited 2017 Feb 12]; (48):743-8. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959804911004898 |