OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the costs of implementing a church-based, telephone-counseling program for increasing mammography use, and to identify the components of costs and the likely cost-effectiveness in hypothetical communities with varying characteristics. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: An ethnically and socioeconomically diverse sample of 1,443 women recruited from 45 churches participating in the Los Angeles Mammography Promotion (LAMP) program were followed from 1995 to 1997. STUDY DESIGN: Churches were stratified into blocks and randomized into three intervention arms-telephone counseling, mail counseling, and control. We surveyed participants before and after the intervention to collect data on mammography use and demographic characteristics. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We used call records, activity reports, and interviews to collect data on the time and materials needed to organize and carry out the intervention. We constructed a standard model of costs and cost-effectiveness based on these data and the Year One results of the LAMP program. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The cost in materials and overhead to the church site was $10.89 per participant and $188 per additional screening. However, when the estimated cost for church volunteers' time was included, the cost of the intervention increased substantially. CONCLUSIONS: A church-based program to promote the use of mammography would be feasible for many churches with the use of volunteer labor and resources.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the costs of implementing a church-based, telephone-counseling program for increasing mammography use, and to identify the components of costs and the likely cost-effectiveness in hypothetical communities with varying characteristics. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: An ethnically and socioeconomically diverse sample of 1,443 women recruited from 45 churches participating in the Los Angeles Mammography Promotion (LAMP) program were followed from 1995 to 1997. STUDY DESIGN: Churches were stratified into blocks and randomized into three intervention arms-telephone counseling, mail counseling, and control. We surveyed participants before and after the intervention to collect data on mammography use and demographic characteristics. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We used call records, activity reports, and interviews to collect data on the time and materials needed to organize and carry out the intervention. We constructed a standard model of costs and cost-effectiveness based on these data and the Year One results of the LAMP program. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The cost in materials and overhead to the church site was $10.89 per participant and $188 per additional screening. However, when the estimated cost for church volunteers' time was included, the cost of the intervention increased substantially. CONCLUSIONS: A church-based program to promote the use of mammography would be feasible for many churches with the use of volunteer labor and resources.
Authors: L Nyström; L E Rutqvist; S Wall; A Lindgren; M Lindqvist; S Rydén; I Andersson; N Bjurstam; G Fagerberg; J Frisell Journal: Lancet Date: 1993-04-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: N Urban; S Self; L Kessler; R Prentice; M Henderson; D Iverson; D Thompson; D Byar; W Insull; S L Gorbach Journal: Control Clin Trials Date: 1990-04
Authors: Nancy L Keating; A James O'Malley; Joanne M Murabito; Kirsten P Smith; Nicholas A Christakis Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-01-24 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Christina M Robinson; Michael L Beach; Mary Ann Greene; Andrea Cassells; Jonathan N Tobin; Allen J Dietrich Journal: J Ambul Care Manage Date: 2010 Apr-Jun
Authors: Yamilé Molina; Catherine M Pichardo; Donald L Patrick; Scott D Ramsey; Sonia Bishop; Shirley A A Beresford; Gloria D Coronado Journal: J Health Dispar Res Pract Date: 2018
Authors: Richard G Roetzheim; Lisa K Christman; Paul B Jacobsen; Alan B Cantor; Jennifer Schroeder; Rania Abdulla; Seft Hunter; Thomas N Chirikos; Jeffrey P Krischer Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2004 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Tung-Sung Tseng; Cheryl L Holt; Michele Shipp; Mohamad Eloubeidi; Kristi Britt; Maria Norena; Mona N Fouad Journal: J Community Health Date: 2009-04
Authors: Mary E Costanza; Roger Luckmann; Mary Jo White; Milagros C Rosal; Caroline Cranos; George Reed; Robin Clark; Susan Sama; Robert Yood Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2011-06-03 Impact factor: 2.655