BACKGROUND: Noncompliance with referral to a physician for retesting and diagnosis is a concern in public cholesterol screening. METHODS:Participants (n = 2109) were referred by a health professional or lay communicator and randomly assigned to a coupon offer, referral reminder letter, or control group. A questionnaire was completed at screening, and a telephone interview was conducted 5 months later. RESULTS: Physician visit rates showed no professional or lay differences. For "no history" subjects, the behavioral interventions were effective compared with controls (coupon = 60.7% and reminder = 57.7% vs control = 46.1%). With professional counseling, only the coupon was effective; for lay counseling, both coupon and reminder yielded higher visit rates. Adjusted for sociodemographics, heart disease risk factors, and health perceptions, the intervention effects remained (professional-coupon offer: odds ratio [OR] = 1.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.21, 3.09; professional-reminder letter: OR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.67, 1.63; lay-coupon offer: OR = 2.52, 95% CI = 1.52, 4.18; and lay-reminder letter: OR = 3.10, 95% CI = 1.83, 5.22). CONCLUSIONS: For unaware participants, lay counselors and referral follow-up efforts tailored to specific cholesterol risk groups are indicated.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Noncompliance with referral to a physician for retesting and diagnosis is a concern in public cholesterol screening. METHODS:Participants (n = 2109) were referred by a health professional or lay communicator and randomly assigned to a coupon offer, referral reminder letter, or control group. A questionnaire was completed at screening, and a telephone interview was conducted 5 months later. RESULTS: Physician visit rates showed no professional or lay differences. For "no history" subjects, the behavioral interventions were effective compared with controls (coupon = 60.7% and reminder = 57.7% vs control = 46.1%). With professional counseling, only the coupon was effective; for lay counseling, both coupon and reminder yielded higher visit rates. Adjusted for sociodemographics, heart disease risk factors, and health perceptions, the intervention effects remained (professional-coupon offer: odds ratio [OR] = 1.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.21, 3.09; professional-reminder letter: OR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.67, 1.63; lay-coupon offer: OR = 2.52, 95% CI = 1.52, 4.18; and lay-reminder letter: OR = 3.10, 95% CI = 1.83, 5.22). CONCLUSIONS: For unaware participants, lay counselors and referral follow-up efforts tailored to specific cholesterol risk groups are indicated.
Authors: T Byers; R Mullis; J Anderson; L Dusenbury; R Gorsky; C Kimber; K Krueger; S Kuester; A Mokdad; G Perry Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 1995-05 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Joanne M Fuller; Keith K Wong; Ronald Grunstein; Ines Krass; Jayshree Patel; Bandana Saini Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-06-30 Impact factor: 3.240