OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this intervention was to increase mammography adherence in women who had not had a mammogram in the last 15 months. METHODS: A prospective randomized intervention trial used four groups: (1) usual care, (2) tailored telephone counseling, (3) tailored print, (4) tailored telephone counseling and print. Participants included a total of 1244 women from two sites-a general medicine clinic setting serving predominately low-income clientele and a Health Maintenance Organization (HMO). Computer-tailored interventions addressed each woman's perceived risk of breast cancer, benefits and/or barriers and self-efficacy related to mammography screening comparing delivery by telephone and mail. RESULTS: Compared to usual care all intervention groups increased mammography adherence significantly (odds ratio 1.60-1.91) when the entire sample was included. CONCLUSIONS: All interventions groups demonstrated efficacy in increasing mammography adherence as compared to a usual care group. When the intervention analysis considered baseline stage, pre contemplators (women who did not intend to get a mammogram) did not significantly increase in mammography adherence as compared to usual care. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Women who are in pre contemplation stage may need a more intensive intervention.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this intervention was to increase mammography adherence in women who had not had a mammogram in the last 15 months. METHODS: A prospective randomized intervention trial used four groups: (1) usual care, (2) tailored telephone counseling, (3) tailored print, (4) tailored telephone counseling and print. Participants included a total of 1244 women from two sites-a general medicine clinic setting serving predominately low-income clientele and a Health Maintenance Organization (HMO). Computer-tailored interventions addressed each woman's perceived risk of breast cancer, benefits and/or barriers and self-efficacy related to mammography screening comparing delivery by telephone and mail. RESULTS: Compared to usual care all intervention groups increased mammography adherence significantly (odds ratio 1.60-1.91) when the entire sample was included. CONCLUSIONS: All interventions groups demonstrated efficacy in increasing mammography adherence as compared to a usual care group. When the intervention analysis considered baseline stage, pre contemplators (women who did not intend to get a mammogram) did not significantly increase in mammography adherence as compared to usual care. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Women who are in pre contemplation stage may need a more intensive intervention.
Authors: Barbara K Rimer; Susan Halabi; Celette Sugg Skinner; Isaac M Lipkus; Tara S Strigo; Ellen B Kaplan; Gregory P Samsa Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Emily White; Diana L Miglioretti; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Berta M Geller; Robert D Rosenberg; Karla Kerlikowske; Laura Saba; Pamela M Vacek; Patricia A Carney; Diana S M Buist; Nina Oestreicher; William Barlow; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Stephen H Taplin Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2004-12-15 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Melissa A Clark; William Rakowski; Beverly Ehrich; Barbara K Rimer; Wayne F Velicer; Catherine E Dube; Deborah N Pearlman; Kristen K Peterson; Michael Goldstein Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Steven J Atlas; Richard W Grant; William T Lester; Jeffrey M Ashburner; Yuchiao Chang; Michael J Barry; Henry C Chueh Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2010-09-15 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Cornelia Beck; Jean C McSweeney; Kathy C Richards; Paula K Roberson; Pao-Feng Tsai; Elaine Souder Journal: Nurs Outlook Date: 2010 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 3.250
Authors: Jennifer M Gierisch; Jo Anne Earp; Noel T Brewer; Barbara K Rimer Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2010-03-30 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Sandra L Spoelstra; Charles W Given; Alla Sikorskii; Constantinos K Coursaris; Atreyee Majumder; Tracy DeKoekkoek; Monica Schueller; Barbara A Given Journal: J Adv Nurs Date: 2015-06-23 Impact factor: 3.187
Authors: Jennifer M Gierisch; Jessica T DeFrank; J Michael Bowling; Barbara K Rimer; Jeanine M Matuszewski; David Farrell; Celette Sugg Skinner Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 5.043