Literature DB >> 18098272

Cost-effectiveness of targeted and tailored interventions on colorectal cancer screening use.

David R Lairson1, Melissa DiCarlo, Ronald E Myers, Thomas Wolf, James Cocroft, Randa Sifri, Michael Rosenthal, Sally W Vernon, Richard Wender.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is cost-effective but underused. The objective of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of targeted and tailored behavioral interventions to increase CRC screening use by conducting an economic analysis associated with a randomized trial among patients in a large, racially and ethnically diverse, urban family practice in Philadelphia.
METHODS: The incremental costs per unit increase were measured in individuals who were screened during the 24 months after intervention. Percent increase in screening was adjusted for baseline differences in the study groups. Each intervention arm received a targeted screening invitation letter, stool blood test (SBT) cards, informational booklet, and reminder letter. Tailored interventions incrementally added tailored messages and reminder telephone calls.
RESULTS: Program costs of the targeted intervention were 42 dollars per participant. Additional costs of adding tailored print materials and of delivering a reminder telephone call were 150 dollars and 200 dollars per participant, respectively. The cost per additional individual screened was 319 dollars when comparing the no intervention group with the targeted intervention group.
CONCLUSIONS: The targeted intervention was more effective and less costly than the tailored intervention. Although tailoring plus reminder telephone call was the most effective strategy, it was very costly per additional individual screened. Mailed SBT cards significantly boosted CRC screening use. However, going beyond the targeted intervention to include tailoring or tailoring plus reminder calls in the manner used in this study did not appear to be an economically attractive strategy. Cancer 2008. (c) 2007 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18098272     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23232

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  27 in total

1.  The effectiveness of a secure email reminder system for colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  David Muller; Judith Logan; David Dorr; David Mosen
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2009-11-14

2.  Cost-effectiveness of patient mailings to promote colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Thomas D Sequist; Calvin Franz; John Z Ayanian
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.983

Review 3.  Treating perioperative anxiety and pain in children: a tailored and innovative approach.

Authors:  Michelle A Fortier; Zeev N Kain
Journal:  Paediatr Anaesth       Date:  2014-09-30       Impact factor: 2.556

4.  An economic evaluation of colorectal cancer screening in primary care practice.

Authors:  Richard T Meenan; Melissa L Anderson; Jessica Chubak; Sally W Vernon; Sharon Fuller; Ching-Yun Wang; Beverly B Green
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 5.043

5.  Sociopsychological tailoring to address colorectal cancer screening disparities: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Anthony Jerant; Richard L Kravitz; Nancy Sohler; Kevin Fiscella; Raquel L Romero; Bennett Parnes; Daniel J Tancredi; Sergio Aguilar-Gaxiola; Christina Slee; Simon Dvorak; Charles Turner; Andrew Hudnut; Francisco Prieto; Peter Franks
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2014 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.166

6.  Challenges in tailored intervention research.

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

7.  Economic analysis of an internet-based depression prevention intervention.

Authors:  Alexander Ruby; Monika Marko-Holguin; Joshua Fogel; Benjamin W Van Voorhees
Journal:  J Ment Health Policy Econ       Date:  2013-09

8.  Cost-effectiveness of a standard intervention versus a navigated intervention on colorectal cancer screening use in primary care.

Authors:  David R Lairson; Melissa Dicarlo; Ashish A Deshmuk; Heather B Fagan; Randa Sifri; Nora Katurakes; James Cocroft; Jocelyn Sendecki; Heidi Swan; Sally W Vernon; Ronald E Myers
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-01-16       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Comparison of breast and bowel cancer screening uptake patterns in a common cohort of South Asian women in England.

Authors:  Charlotte L Price; Ala K Szczepura; Anil K Gumber; Julietta Patnick
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-04-27       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Program to improve colorectal cancer screening in a low-income, racially diverse population: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Muriel Jean-Jacques; Erin O Kaleba; John L Gatta; Gabriela Gracia; Elizabeth R Ryan; Bechara N Choucair
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.166

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.