Dataset Information

Breast cancer screening outreach effectiveness: Mammogram-specific reminders vs. comprehensive preventive services birthday letters.

ABSTRACT: We compared the effectiveness of two outreach strategies on timely mammography adherence: a mammogram-specific reminder letter (sent just before a woman was due) to a birthday letter (addresses multiple preventive services and not timed around due dates). We evaluated screening mammography adherence following 79,848 mammogram-specific and 151,626 birthday letters mailed between 2002 and 2012 to women aged 40-74years enrolled in Kaiser Permanente Washington. Screening mammogram adherence was specifically tied to due date and was evaluated separately by age group and up-to-date or overdue status at the time of mailing. We used generalized estimating equations to account for correlation between repeated observations, to model the odds of screening mammography adherence by letter type. Among women up-to-date, adherence following birthday letters was 22-76% lower compared to the mammogram-specific reminders, with the greatest decreases in adherence in women aged 70-74. Birthday letters were more effective at activating screening uptake among some subgroups of overdue women aged 50-69 and most overdue women aged 70-74, but universally low adherence rates were observed in overdue women. Increasing number of recommended services for women aged 50-74 who were up-to-date resulted in 12-17% lower mammography adherence, but had no effect in women aged 40-49 or in overdue women. Birthday letters are less effective than mammogram-specific reminder letters at prompting women to undergo timely breast cancer screening, particularly among women up-to-date with screening. Birthday letters may be effective at increasing overall preventive care; however, supplemental outreach may be needed around the due date to increase timely preventive services receipt.

SUBMITTER: Buist DSM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5638650 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Breast cancer screening outreach effectiveness: Mammogram-specific reminders vs. comprehensive preventive services birthday letters.

Buist Diana S M DSM Gao Hongyuan H Anderson Melissa L ML Onega Tracy T Brandzel Susan S Rabelhofer Melissa A MA Bradford Susan Carol SC Aiello Bowles Erin J EJ

Preventive medicine 20170624

We compared the effectiveness of two outreach strategies on timely mammography adherence: a mammogram-specific reminder letter (sent just before a woman was due) to a birthday letter (addresses multiple preventive services and not timed around due dates). We evaluated screening mammography adherence following 79,848 mammogram-specific and 151,626 birthday letters mailed between 2002 and 2012 to women aged 40-74years enrolled in Kaiser Permanente Washington. Screening mammogram adherence was spec ...[more]

PMID: 28655547

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRates of breast cancer (BC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening are particularly low among poor and minority patients. Multifaceted interventions have been shown to improve cancer-screening rates, yet the relative impact of the specific components of these interventions has not been assessed. Identifying the specific components necessary to improve cancer-screening rates is critical to tailor interventions in resource limited environments.ObjectiveTo assess the relative impact of various components of the reminder, recall, and outreach (RRO) model on BC and CRC screening rates within a safety net practice.DesignPragmatic randomized trial.ParticipantsMen and women aged 50-74 years past due for CRC screen and women aged 40-74 years past due for BC screening.InterventionsWe randomized 1,008 patients to one of four groups: (1) reminder letter; (2) letter and automated telephone message (Letter + Autodial); (3) letter, automated telephone message, and point of service prompt (Letter + Autodial + Prompt); or (4) letter and personal telephone call (Letter + Personal Call).Main measuresDocumentation of mammography or colorectal cancer screening at 52 weeks following randomization.Key resultsCompared to a reminder letter alone, Letter + Personal Call was more effective at improving screening rates for BC (17.8 % vs. 27.5 %; AOR 2.2, 95 % CI 1.2-4.0) and CRC screening (12.2 % vs. 21.5 %; AOR 2.0, 95 % CI 1.1-3.9). Compared to letter alone, a Letter + Autodial + Prompt was also more effective at improving rates of BC screening (17.8 % vs. 28.2 %; AOR 2.1, 95 % CI 1.1-3.7) and CRC screening (12.2 % vs. 19.6 %; AOR 1.9, 95 % CI 1.0-3.7). Letter + Autodial was not more effective than a letter alone at improving screening rates.ConclusionsThe addition of a personal telephone call or a patient-specific provider prompt were both more effective at improving mammogram and CRC screening rates compared to a reminder letter alone. The use of automated telephone calls, however, did not provide any incremental benefit to a reminder letter alone.

Project description:Importance:Mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach is more effective than colonoscopy outreach for increasing 1-time colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but long-term effectiveness may need repeat testing and timely follow-up for abnormal results. Objective:Compare the effectiveness of FIT outreach and colonoscopy outreach to increase completion of the CRC screening process (screening initiation and follow-up) within 3 years. Design, Setting, and Participants:Pragmatic randomized clinical trial from March 2013 to July 2016 among 5999 participants aged 50 to 64 years who were receiving primary care in Parkland Health and Hospital System and were not up to date with CRC screenings. Interventions:Random assignment to mailed FIT outreach (n?=?2400), mailed colonoscopy outreach (n?=?2400), or usual care with clinic-based screening (n?=?1199). Outreach included processes to promote repeat annual testing for individuals in the FIT outreach group with normal results and completion of diagnostic and screening colonoscopy for those with an abnormal FIT result or assigned to colonoscopy outreach. Main Outcomes and Measures:Primary outcome was screening process completion, defined as adherence to colonoscopy completion, annual testing for a normal FIT result, diagnostic colonoscopy for an abnormal FIT result, or treatment evaluation if CRC was detected. Secondary outcomes included detection of any adenoma or advanced neoplasia (including CRC) and screening-related harms (including bleeding or perforation). Results:All 5999 participants (median age, 56 years; women, 61.9%) were included in the intention-to-screen analyses. Screening process completion was 38.4% in the colonoscopy outreach group, 28.0% in the FIT outreach group, and 10.7% in the usual care group. Compared with the usual care group, between-group differences for completion were higher for both outreach groups (27.7% [95% CI, 25.1% to 30.4%] for the colonoscopy outreach group; 17.3% [95% CI, 14.8% to 19.8%] for FIT outreach group), and highest in the colonoscopy outreach group (10.4% [95% CI, 7.8% to 13.1%] for the colonoscopy outreach group vs FIT outreach group; P?<?.001 for all comparisons). Compared with usual care, the between-group differences in adenoma and advanced neoplasia detection rates were higher for both outreach groups (colonoscopy outreach group: 10.3% [95% CI, 9.5% to 12.1%] for adenoma and 3.1% [95% CI, 2.0% to 4.1%] for advanced neoplasia, P?<?.001 for both comparisons; FIT outreach group: 1.3% [95% CI, -0.1% to 2.8%] for adenoma and 0.7% [95% CI, -0.2% to 1.6%] for advanced neoplasia, P?<?.08 and P?<?.13, respectively), and highest in the colonoscopy outreach group (colonoscopy outreach group vs FIT outreach group: 9.0% [95% CI, 7.3% to 10.7%] for adenoma and 2.4% [95% CI, 1.3% to 3.3%] for advanced neoplasia, P?<?.001 for both comparisons). There were no screening-related harms in any groups. Conclusions and Relevance:Among persons aged 50 to 64 years receiving primary care at a safety-net institution, mailed outreach invitations offering FIT or colonoscopy compared with usual care increased the proportion completing CRC screening process within 3 years. The rate of screening process completion was higher with colonoscopy than FIT outreach. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01710215.

Project description:Interventions: The recruitment process will follow 2 ways: 1.Based on the characterization, the target population recorded in the database of the insurance health company will be invited to participate until the estimated sample size is completed. 2. During the hospitalization the patients can be detected and invited to participate into the study. In both, the informed consent will be a prior and required procedure. The study will assess the outcomes in the same group of patients before and after intervention. The intervention follows the next steps: 1. Case detection: Identifying if the patient suffers from multiple diseases, if there are readmissions and high demand for health services during hospital stay or according to the reports of the health promoting entity (EPS in Spanish). 2. Case screening: assessing complexity INTERMED scale (European Consultation-Liaison Workgroup for General Hospital Psychiatry and Psychosomatic), medium-high or high). 3. To establish the baseline measurement of indicators to comparate during post-intervention. 4. Comprehensive and multidimensional assessment of the patient: identifying care needs. 5. Assessment of caregiver burden: identifying fatigue and general health status. 6. Personalized care plan: a comprehensive and individual plan is made for each case according to the needs detected. 7. Coordination between providers: contacts and procedures to secure referral to service providers as required by the patient and the family caregiver. 8. Monitoring and evaluation of the personalized plan.;Comprehensive Health Care;Patient Care Management;Long-Term Care;Delivery of Health Care ;Progressive Patient Care;Caregivers Primary outcome(s): 1. Demand for health care services. (Frequency of use of health services for causes related to multi-pathological clinical categories, Measurement tool: Patients Database). Measurement time: At baseline and, 6 months. 2. Admission and re-admission (Frequency of unscheduled admissions and re-admissions related to multi-pathological clinical categories, Measurement tool: Patients Database). Measurement time: At baseline and, 6 months. 3. Pharmaceutical prescription (Medications prescribed to the patient,Measurement tool: drug-dispending database). Measurement time: At baseline and, 6 months. Study Design: Allocation: Non-randomized controlled trial. Masking: Open. Control group: Historical. Assignment: Single group. Purpose: Prevention

Dataset Information

Breast cancer screening outreach effectiveness: Mammogram-specific reminders vs. comprehensive preventive services birthday letters.

Publications

Breast cancer screening outreach effectiveness: Mammogram-specific reminders vs. comprehensive preventive services birthday letters.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets