Client-directed interventions to increase community demand for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening a systematic review

Impact of mailed and automated telephone reminders on receipt of repeat mammograms: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This study compares the efficacy of three types of reminders in promoting annual repeat mammography screening.

DESIGN

RCT.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Study recruitment occurred in 2004-2005. Participants were recruited through the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees. All were aged 40-75 years and had a screening mammogram prior to study enrollment. A total of 3547 women completed baseline telephone interviews.

INTERVENTION

Prior to study recruitment, women were assigned randomly to one of three reminder groups: (1) printed enhanced usual care reminders (EUCRs); (2) automated telephone reminders (ATRs) identical in content to EUCRs; or (3) enhanced letter reminders that included additional information guided by behavioral theory. Interventions were delivered 2-3 months prior to women's mammography due dates.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Repeat mammography adherence, defined as having a mammogram no sooner than 10 months and no later than 14 months after the enrollment mammogram.

RESULTS

Each intervention produced adherence proportions that ranged from 72% to 76%. Post-intervention adherence rates increased by an absolute 17.8% from baseline. Women assigned to ATRs were significantly more likely to have had mammograms than women assigned to EUCRs (p=0.014). Comparisons of reminder efficacy did not vary across key subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although all reminders were effective in promoting repeat mammography adherence, ATRs were the most effective and lowest in cost. Health organizations should consider using ATRs to maximize proportions of members who receive mammograms at annual intervals.

Factors associated with annual-interval mammography for women in their 40s

BACKGROUND

Evidence is mounting that annual mammography for women in their 40s may be the optimal schedule to reduce morbidity and mortality from breast cancer. Few studies have assessed predictors of repeat mammography on an annual interval among these women.

METHODS

We assessed mammography screening status among 596 insured Black and Non-Hispanic white women ages 43-49. Adherence was defined as having a second mammogram 10-14 months after a previous mammogram. We examined socio-demographic, medical and healthcare-related variables on receipt of annual-interval repeat mammograms. We also assessed barriers associated with screening.

RESULTS

44.8% of the sample were adherent to annual-interval mammography. A history of self-reported abnormal mammograms, family history of breast cancer and never having smoked were associated with adherence. Saying they had not received mammography reminders and reporting barriers to mammography were associated with non-adherence. Four barrier categories were associated with women's non-adherence: lack of knowledge/not thinking mammograms are needed, cost, being too busy, and forgetting to make/keep appointments.

CONCLUSIONS

Barriers we identified are similar to those found in other studies. Health professionals may need to take extra care in discussing mammography screening risk and benefits due to ambiguity about screening guidelines for women in their 40s, especially for women without family histories of breast cancer or histories of abnormal mammograms. Reminders are important in promoting mammography and should be coupled with other strategies to help women maintain adherence to regular mammography.

Trends in colorectal cancer screening disparities in people aged 50-64 years, 2000-2005

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are low, and racial, ethnic, and economic disparities have been reported. Whether disparities in CRC screening have decreased over time is unknown. This study aimed to determine whether progress was made between 2000 and 2005 in reducing CRC screening disparities by race, ethnicity, income, and insurance status.

METHODS

Age-adjusted percentages of participants aged 50-64 who reported CRC screening (home fecal occult blood test in the past year or endoscopy in the past 10 years) were estimated from the 2000 (n=6,020 participants) and 2005 (n=6,706) cancer control supplements of the National Health Interview Survey, with analysis in 2007.

RESULTS

Screening rates did not increase between 2000 and 2005 for Hispanic women or uninsured women. Only for high-income participants did screening exceed 50%. For both men and women, the uninsured had the lowest levels of screening (19.1% and 19.3%, respectively, in 2005), and the greatest disparities were observed among groups defined by health insurance status. For women, disparities by ethnicity, income, and insurance status increased over time, whereas among men, disparities in 2005 were similar to those in 2000. For Hispanic women, growing disparities were present at all income and insurance levels and persisted after additional adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

No progress was made in reducing most CRC screening disparities between 2000 and 2005. Methods are needed to increase CRC screening among everyone, but in particular Hispanic women and uninsured men and women.

Client-directed interventions to increase community access to breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening a systematic review

Most major medical organizations recommend routine screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. Screening can lead to early detection of these cancers, resulting in reduced mortality. Yet not all people who should be screened are screened, either regularly or, in some cases, ever. This report presents the results of systematic reviews of effectiveness, applicability, economic efficiency, barriers to implementation, and other harms or benefits of interventions designed to increase screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers by increasing community access to these services. Evidence from these reviews indicates that screening for breast cancer (by mammography) has been increased effectively by reducing structural barriers and by reducing out-of pocket client costs, and that screening for colorectal cancer (by fecal occult blood test) has been increased effectively by reducing structural barriers. Additional research is needed to determine whether screening for cervical cancer (by Pap test) can be increased by reducing structural barriers and by reducing out-of-pocket costs, whether screening for colorectal cancer (fecal occult blood test) can be increased by reducing out-of-pocket costs, and whether these interventions are effective in increasing the use of other colorectal cancer screening procedures (i.e., flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, double contrast barium enema). Specific areas for further research are also suggested in this report.

Interventions to increase recommendation and delivery of screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers by healthcare providers systematic reviews of provider assessment and feedback and provider incentives

Most major medical organizations recommend routine screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. Screening can lead to early detection of these cancers, resulting in reduced mortality. Yet not all people who should be screened are screened, either regularly or, in some cases, ever. This report presents results of systematic reviews of effectiveness, applicability, economic efficiency, barriers to implementation, and other harms or benefits of two provider-directed intervention approaches to increase screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. These approaches, provider assessment and feedback, and provider incentives encourage providers to deliver screening services at appropriate intervals. Evidence in these reviews indicates that provider assessment and feedback interventions can effectively increase screening by mammography, Pap test, and fecal occult blood test. Health plans, healthcare systems, and cancer control coalitions should consider such evidence-based findings when implementing interventions to increase screening use. Evidence was insufficient to determine the effectiveness of provider incentives in increasing use of any of these tests. Specific areas for further research are suggested in this report, including the need for additional research to determine whether provider incentives are effective in increasing use of any of these screening tests, and whether assessment and feedback interventions are effective in increasing other tests for colorectal cancer (i.e., flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, or double-contrast barium enema).