Dataset Information

Educational interventions to improve screening mammography interpretation: a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:The objective of our study was to conduct a randomized controlled trial of educational interventions that were created to improve performance of screening mammography interpretation. MATERIALS AND METHODS:We randomly assigned physicians who interpret mammography to one of three groups: self-paced DVD, live expert-led educational seminar, or control. The DVD and seminar interventions used mammography cases of varying difficulty and provided associated teaching points. Interpretive performance was compared using a pretest-posttest design. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) were calculated relative to two outcomes: cancer status and consensus of three experts about recall. The performance measures for each group were compared using logistic regression adjusting for pretest performance. RESULTS:One hundred two radiologists completed all aspects of the trial. After adjustment for preintervention performance, the odds of improved sensitivity for correctly identifying a lesion relative to expert recall were 1.34 times higher for DVD participants than for control subjects (95% CI, 1.00-1.81; p = 0.050). The odds of an improved PPV for correctly identifying a lesion relative to both expert recall (odds ratio [OR] = 1.94; 95% CI, 1.24-3.05; p = 0.004) and cancer status (OR = 1.81; 95% CI, 1.01-3.23; p = 0.045) were significantly improved for DVD participants compared with control subjects, with no significant change in specificity. For the seminar group, specificity was significantly lower than the control group (OR relative to expert recall = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64-1.00; p = 0.048; OR relative to cancer status = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65-0.95; p = 0.015). CONCLUSION:In this randomized controlled trial, the DVD educational intervention resulted in a significant improvement in screening mammography interpretive performance on a test set, which could translate into improved interpretative performance in clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Geller BM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4276372 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Educational interventions to improve screening mammography interpretation: a randomized controlled trial.

Geller Berta M BM Bogart Andy A Carney Patricia A PA Sickles Edward A EA Smith Robert R Monsees Barbara B Bassett Lawrence W LW Buist Diana M DM Kerlikowske Karla K Onega Tracy T Yankaskas Bonnie C BC Haneuse Sebastien S Hill Deirdre D Wallis Matthew G MG Miglioretti Diana D

AJR. American journal of roentgenology 20140601 6

<h4>Objective</h4>The objective of our study was to conduct a randomized controlled trial of educational interventions that were created to improve performance of screening mammography interpretation.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>We randomly assigned physicians who interpret mammography to one of three groups: self-paced DVD, live expert-led educational seminar, or control. The DVD and seminar interventions used mammography cases of varying difficulty and provided associated teaching points. Int ...[more]

PMID: 24848854

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundColonoscopy attendance is a key quality parameter in colorectal cancer population screening programmes. Within these programmes, educative interventions with bidirectional contact carried out by trained personnel have been proved to be an important tool for colonoscopy attendance improvement, and because of its huge clinical and economic impact, they have been widely implemented. However, outside of this population programmes, educative measures to improve colonoscopy attendance have been poorly studied and no navigation interventions are usually performed.AimTo investigate the clinical and economic impacts of an educational telephone intervention on colonoscopy attendance outside colorectal cancer screening programmes.MethodsThis randomized controlled trial included consecutive patients referred to colonoscopy from primary care centres from November 2017 to May 2018. The intervention group (IG) received a telephone intervention, while the control group (CG) did not. Patients assigned to the IG received an educational telephone call 7 d before the colonoscopy appointment. The intervention was carried out by two nurses with deep endoscopic knowledge who were previously trained for a telephone educational intervention for colonoscopy. The impact on patient compliance with preparedness protocols related to bowel cleansing, anti-thrombotic management, and sedation scheduling was also evaluated. A second call was conducted to assess patient satisfaction. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses were performed.ResultsA total of 738 and 746 patients were finally included in the IG and CG respectively. Six hundred thirteen (83%) patients were contacted in the IG. The non-attendance rate was lower in the IG, both in the ITT analysis (IG 8.4% vs CG 14.3%, P < 0.001) and in the PP analysis (4.4% vs 14.3%, P < 0.001). In a multivariable analysis, belonging to the control group increased the risk of non-attendance in both, the ITT analysis (OR 1.81, 95%CI: 1.27 to 2.58, P = 0.001) and the PP analysis (OR 3.56, 95%CI: 2.25 to 5.64, P < 0.001). There was also a significant difference in compliance with preparedness protocols [bowel cleansing: IG 61.7% vs CG 52.6% (P = 0.001), antithrombotic management: IG 92.5% vs CG 62.8% (P = 0.001), and sedation scheduling: IG 78.8% vs CG 0% (P ? 0.001)]. We observed a net benefit of €55600/year after the intervention. The information given before the procedure was rated as excellent by 26% (CG) and 51% (IG) of patients, P ? 0.001.ConclusionEducational telephone nurse intervention improves attendance, protocol compliance and patient satisfaction in the non-screening colonoscopy setting and has a large economic impact, which supports its imple-mentation and maintenance over time.

Project description:The registration of clinical trials has been promoted to prevent publication bias and increase research transparency. Despite general agreement about the minimum amount of information needed for trial registration, we lack clear guidance on descriptions of non-pharmacologic interventions in trial registries. We aimed to evaluate the quality of registry descriptions of non-pharmacologic interventions assessed in ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patient education.On 6 May 2009, we searched for all ongoing RCTs registered in the 10 trial registries accessible through the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We included trials evaluating an educational intervention (that is, designed to teach or train patients about their own health) and dedicated to participants, their family members or home caregivers. We used a standardized data extraction form to collect data related to the description of the experimental intervention, the centers, and the caregivers.We selected 268 of 642 potentially eligible studies and appraised a random sample of 150 records. All selected trials were registered in 4 registers, mainly ClinicalTrials.gov (61%). The median [interquartile range] target sample size was 205 [100 to 400] patients. The comparator was mainly usual care (47%) or active treatment (47%). A minority of records (17%, 95% CI 11 to 23%) reported an overall adequate description of the intervention (that is, description that reported the content, mode of delivery, number, frequency, duration of sessions and overall duration of the intervention). Further, for most reports (59%), important information about the content of the intervention was missing. The description of the mode of delivery of the intervention was reported for 52% of studies, the number of sessions for 74%, the frequency of sessions for 58%, the duration of each session for 45% and the overall duration for 63%. Information about the caregivers was missing for 70% of trials. Most trials (73%) took place in the United States or United Kingdom, 64% involved only one centre, and participating centers were mainly tertiary-care, academic or university hospitals (51%).Educational interventions assessed in ongoing RCTs of educational interventions are poorly described in trial registries. The lack of adequate description raises doubts about the ability of trial registration to help patients and researchers know about the treatment evaluated in trials of education.

Project description:BackgroundDecision aids can support informed choice in mammography screening, but for the German mammography screening programme no systematically evaluated decision aid exists to date. We developed a decision aid for women invited to this programme for the first time based on the criteria of the International Patient Decision Aids Standards Collaboration.ObjectiveTo determine whether a decision aid increases informed choice about mammography screening programme participation.MethodsA representative sample of 7,400 women aged 50 was drawn from registration offices in Westphalia-Lippe, Germany. Women were randomised to receive usual care (i.e., the standard information brochure sent with the programme's invitation letter) or the decision aid. Data were collected online at baseline, post-intervention, and 3 months follow-up. The primary outcome was informed choice. Secondary outcomes were the constituents of informed choice (knowledge, attitude, intention/uptake), decisional conflict, decision regret, and decision stage. Outcomes were analysed using latent structural equation models and χ2-tests.Results1,206 women participated (response rate of 16.3%). The decision aid increased informed choice. Women in the control group had lower odds to make an informed choice at post-intervention (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.18-0.37) and at follow-up (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46-0.94); informed choices remained constant at 30%. This was also reflected in lower knowledge and more decisional conflict. Post-intervention, the uptake intention was higher in the control group, whereas the uptake rate at follow-up was similar. Women in the control group had a more positive attitude at follow-up than women receiving the decision aid. Decision regret and decision stage were not influenced by the intervention.ConclusionThis paper describes the first systematic evaluation of a newly developed decision aid for the German mammography screening programme in a randomised controlled trial. Our decision aid proved to be an effective tool to enhance the rate of informed choice and was made accessible to the public.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00005176.

Project description:BackgroundDespite the demonstrated need to increase screening mammography utilization and strong evidence that mail and telephone outreach to women can increase screening, most managed care organizations have not adopted comprehensive outreach programs. The uncertainty about optimum strategies and cost effectiveness have retarded widespread acceptance. While 70% of women report getting a mammogram within the prior 2 years, repeat mammography rates are less than 50%. This 5-year study is conducted though a Central Massachusetts healthcare plan and affiliated clinic. All women have adequate health insurance to cover the test.Methods/designThis randomized study compares 3 arms: reminder letter alone; reminder letter plus reminder call; reminder letter plus a second reminder and booklet plus a counselor call. All calls provide women with the opportunity to schedule a mammogram in a reasonable time. The invention period will span 4 years and include repeat attempts. The counselor arm is designed to educate, motivate and counsel women in an effort to alleviate PCP burden.All women who have been in the healthcare plan for 24 months and who have a current primary care provider (PCP) and who are aged 51-84 are randomized to 1 of 3 arms. Interventions are limited to women who become ≥ 18 months from a prior mammogram. Women and their physicians may opt out of the intervention study.Measurement of completed mammograms will use plan billing records and clinic electronic records. The primary outcome is the proportion of women continuously enrolled for ≥ 24 months who have had ≥ 1 mammogram in the last 24 months. Secondary outcomes include the number of women who need repeat interventions. The cost effectiveness analysis will measure all costs from the provider perspective.DiscussionSo far, 18,509 women aged 51-84 have been enrolled into our tracking database and were randomized into one of three arms. At baseline, 5,223 women were eligible for an intervention. We anticipate that the outcome will provide firm data about the maximal effectiveness as well as the cost effectiveness of the interventions both for increasing the mammography rate and the repeat mammography rate.Trial registrationhttp://clinicaltrials.gov/NCT01332032.

Project description:Few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) report interventions targeting improvement of frailty status as an outcome.This RCT enrolled 117 older adults (65-79?years of age) in Toufen, Taiwan who scored 3-6 on The Chinese Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale Telephone Version and then score ?1 on the Cardiovascular Health Study Phenotypic Classification of Frailty (CHS_PCF). With a two by two factorial design, subjects were randomly assigned to interventions (Exercise and nutrition, EN, n?=?55 or problem solving therapy, PST, n?=?57) or controls (non-EN, n?=?62 or non-PST, n?=?60). Educational booklets were provided to all. EN group subjects received nutrition consultation and a thrice-weekly exercise-training program while PST group subjects received 6 sessions in 3?month. Subjects were followed at 3, 6, and 12?months. Primary outcome was improvement of the CHS_PCF by at least one category (from pre-frail to robust, or from frail to pre-frail or robust) from baseline assessments. One hundred and one completed final assessments. Intention-to-treat analysis with the generalized estimating equation model was applied with adjustment for time and treatment-by-time interactions.Mean age was 71.4?±?3.7?years, with 59% females. Baseline characteristic were generally comparable between groups. EN group subjects had a higher improvement rate on the primary outcome than non-EN group subjects (45% vs 27%, adjusted p?=?0.008) at 3?months, but not 6 or 12?months. They also had more increase of serum 25(OH) vitamin D level (4.9?±?7.7 vs 1.2?±?5.4, p?=?0.006) and lower percentage of osteopenia (74% vs 89% p?=?0.042) at 12?months. PST group subjects had better improvement (2.7?±?6.1 vs 0.2?±?6.7, p?=?0.035, 6-month) and less deterioration (-3.5?±?9.7 vs -7.1?±?8.7, p?=?0.036, 12-month) of dominant leg extension power than non-PST subjects. Some secondary outcomes were also improved in control groups (non-EN or non-PST). No adverse effects were reported.The three-month EN intervention resulted in short-term (3-month) frailty status improvement and long-term effect on bone mineral density and serum vitamin D (12-month) among Taiwanese community-dwelling elders. The effect of PST was less pronounced.ClinicalTrials.gov: EC0970301

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate whether opt out framing, messaging incorporating behavioral science concepts, or electronic communication increases the uptake of hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening in patients born between 1945 and 1965.DesignPragmatic randomized controlled trial.Setting43 primary care practices from one academic health system (Philadelphia, PA, USA) between April 2019 and May 2020.ParticipantsPatients born between 1945 and 1965 with no history of screening and at least two primary care visits in the two years before the enrollment period.InterventionsThis multilevel trial was divided into two studies. Substudy A included 1656 eligible patients of 17 primary care clinicians who were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to a mailed letter about HCV screening (letter only), or a similar letter with a laboratory order for HCV screening (letter+order). Substudy B included the remaining 19 837 eligible patients followed by 417 clinicians. Active electronic patient portal users were randomized 1:5 to receive a mailed letter about HCV screening (letter), or an electronic patient portal message with similar content (patient portal); inactive patient portal users were mailed a letter. In a factorial design, patients in substudy B were also randomized 1:1 to receive standard content (usual care), or content based on principles of social norming, anticipated regret, reciprocity, and commitment (behavioral content).Main outcome measuresProportion of patients who completed HCV testing within four months.Results21 303 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Among the 1642 patients in substudy A, 19.2% (95% confidence interval 16.5% to 21.9%) completed screening in the letter only arm and 43.1% (39.7% to 46.4%) in the letter+order arm (P<0.001). Among the 19 661 patients in substudy B, 14.6% (13.9% to 15.3%) completed screening with usual care content and 13.6% (13.0% to 14.3%) with behavioral science content (P=0.06). Among active patient portal users, 17.8% (16.0% to 19.5%) completed screening after receiving a letter and 13.8% (13.1% to 14.5%) after receiving a patient portal message (P<0.001).ConclusionsOpt out framing and effort reduction by including a signed laboratory order with outreach increased screening for HCV. Behavioral science messaging content did not increase uptake, and mailed letters achieved a greater response rate than patient portal messages.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03712553.

Dataset Information

Educational interventions to improve screening mammography interpretation: a randomized controlled trial.

Publications

Educational interventions to improve screening mammography interpretation: a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets