Literature DB >> 10498394

Effectiveness of interventions designed to increase mammography use: a meta-analysis of provider-targeted strategies.

J S Mandelblatt1, K R Yabroff.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of interventions targeted at providers to enhance the use of mammography. We performed a meta-analysis and included United States studies that used a randomized or nonrandomized concurrent control design, had defined outcomes, and presented data that could be abstracted for reanalysis. Interventions were classified as behavioral, cognitive, or sociological and further categorized by the type of control group (active versus usual care). Data were combined using DerSimonian and Laird random effects models to yield summary effect sizes. Thirty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. All types of interventions targeted at providers were effective in increasing mammography rates. Behavioral interventions increased screening by 13.2% [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.8-18.4] as compared with usual care and by 6.8% (95% CI, 4.8-8.7) as compared with active controls. Cognitive intervention strategies improved mammography rates by 18.6% (95% CI, 12.8-24.4). Sociological interventions also had a similar magnitude of effect on screening rates (13.1% increase; 95% CI, 6.8-19.3). Interventions targeting both patients and providers were not significantly better at increasing screening than those targeting providers alone, and multiple approaches (e.g., behavioral and cognitive) were generally not more effective than a single approach. All interventions targeted at physicians were effective in increasing screening rates. Decisions to use a particular approach will depend on resources, expertise, feasibility, and cost effectiveness.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10498394

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  35 in total

1.  Community-based interventions: taking on the cost and cost-effectiveness questions.

Authors:  J E Siegel; C M Clancy
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  The association of race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and physician recommendation for mammography: who gets the message about breast cancer screening?

Authors:  M S O'Malley; J A Earp; S T Hawley; M J Schell; H F Mathews; J Mitchell
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Increasing use of mammography among older, rural African American women: results from a community trial.

Authors:  Jo Anne Earp; Eugenia Eng; Michael S O'Malley; Mary Altpeter; Garth Rauscher; Linda Mayne; Holly F Mathews; Kathy S Lynch; Bahjat Qaqish
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Predicting patterns of mammography use: a geographic perspective on national needs for intervention research.

Authors:  Julie Legler; Nancy Breen; Helen Meissner; Don Malec; Cathy Coyne
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 5.  Disparities in screening mammography. Current status, interventions and implications.

Authors:  Monica E Peek; Jini H Han
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 6.  Interventions to promote repeat breast cancer screening with mammography: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sally W Vernon; Amy McQueen; Jasmin A Tiro; Deborah J del Junco
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-06-29       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Randomized trial of an intervention to improve mammography utilization among a triracial rural population of women.

Authors:  Electra Paskett; Cathy Tatum; Julia Rushing; Robert Michielutte; Ronny Bell; Kristie Long Foley; Marisa Bittoni; Stephanie L Dickinson; Ann Scheck McAlearney; Katherine Reeves
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2006-09-06       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Determinants of non-compliance to recommendations on breast cancer screening among women participating in the French E3N cohort study.

Authors:  Camille Flamant; Estelle Gauthier; Françoise Clavel-Chapelon
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.497

9.  Results of a randomized trial to increase mammogram usage among Samoan women.

Authors:  Shiraz I Mishra; Roshan Bastani; Catherine M Crespi; L Cindy Chang; Pat H Luce; Claudia R Baquet
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 4.254

10.  Geographic methods for understanding and responding to disparities in mammography use in Toronto, Canada.

Authors:  Richard Henry Glazier; Maria Isabella Creatore; Piotr Gozdyra; Flora I Matheson; Leah S Steele; Eleanor Boyle; Rahim Moineddin
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.