Are you Daryl L Wieland?

Claim your profile

Publications (2)5.14 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: : In 2006, the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology updated evidence-based guidelines recommending screening intervals for women with abnormal cervical cytology diagnosis. In our low-income inner-city population, we sought to improve performance by uniformly applying the guidelines to all patients. We report the prospective performance of a comprehensive tracking, evidence-based algorithmically driven call back, and appointment scheduling system for cervical cancer screening in a resource-limited inner-city population. : Outreach efforts were formalized with algorithm-based protocols for triage to colposcopy, with universal adherence to evidence-based guidelines. During implementation from August 2006 to July 2008, we prospectively tracked performance using the electronic medical record with administrative and pathology reports to determine performance variables such as the total number of Pap tests, colposcopy visits, and the distribution of abnormal cytology and histology results, including all cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2, 3 diagnoses. : A total of 86,257 gynecologic visits and 41,527 Pap tests were performed system-wide during this period of widespread and uniform implementation of standard cervical cancer screening guidelines. The number of Pap tests performed per month varied little. The incidence of CIN 1 significantly decreased from 117 (68.4%) of 171 during the first tracked month to 52 (54.7%) of 95 during the last tracked month (p = 0.04). The monthly incidence rate of CIN 2, 3, including incident cervical cancers, did not change. The total number of colposcopy visits declined, resulting in a 50% decrease in costs related to colposcopy services and approximately a 12% decrease in costs related to excisional biopsies. : Adherence to cervical cancer screening guidelines reduced the number of unnecessary colposcopies without increasing numbers of potentially missed CIN 2, 3 lesions, including cervical cancer. Uniform implementation of administrative-based performance initiatives for cervical cancer screening minimizes differences in provider practices and maximizes performance of screening while containing cervical cancer screening costs.
    Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease 10/2011; 15(4):296-302. · 1.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine predictors of treatment failure and recurrence after surgical excisional procedures for CIN in HIV-infected women. A retrospective cohort study was conducted in which 136 eligible HIV-infected women treated for CIN between 1999 and 2005 were included. Data were abstracted from charts and computer databases. Treatment failures were defined as the presence of CIN 1+ at initial follow-up. Recurrences were defined as the presence of CIN 1+ subsequent to initial normal follow-up. Treatment failure at initial follow-up was common, occurring in 51% of CIN 1 and 55% of CIN 2+. Most lesions detected at treatment failure were high grade (>70%), regardless of the grade of initial lesion. Significant risk factors for treatment failure were loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) compared to cold knife conization (RR=1.76; 95% CI: 1.15-2.64), and low CD4+ count (p=0.04). Among those with an initial normal clinical evaluation, 55% eventually recurred. As with treatment failure, most lesions detected at recurrence were high grade. Risk factors for recurrence included use of LEEP (hazard ratio [HR]=3.38; 95% CI: 1.55-7.39), higher HIV RNA level, and the presence of positive margins at treatment (HR=6.12; 95% CI: 1.90-19.73). Most CIN treatment of HIV-infected women studied either failed or resulted in recurrence. Of particular concern, many of these subsequent lesions were high grade. Conization, however, was associated with significantly less failure/recurrence than LEEP. Clinicians treating CIN in HIV-infected women should avoid raising expectations of cure and instead focus on the achievable goal of cancer prevention until there are better therapies for this patient population.
    Gynecologic Oncology 10/2010; 119(1):92-7. · 3.93 Impact Factor