BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the cancer with the highest incidence among women in Chile and in many Latin American countries. Breast cancer screening has very low compliance among Chilean women. METHODS: We compared the effects on mammography screening rates of standard care, of a low-intensity intervention based on mail contact, and of a high-intensity intervention based on mail plus telephone or personal contact. A random sample of 500 women with the age of 50 to 70 years registered at a community clinic in Santiago who had not had a mammogram in the past 2 years were randomly assigned to one of the three intervention groups. Six months after randomization, participants were re-evaluated for their compliance with mammography screening. The outcome was measured by self-report and by electronic clinical records. An intention to treat model was used to analyze the results. RESULTS: Between 92% and 93% of participants completed the study. Based on electronic records, mammography screening rates increased significantly from 6% in the control group to 51.8% in the low-intensity group and 70.1% in the high-intensity group. About 14% of participants in each group received opportunistic advice, 100% of participants in the low- and high-intensity groups received the mail contact, and 50% in the high-intensity group received a telephone or personal contact. CONCLUSION: A primary care intervention based on mail or brief personal contact could significantly improve mammogram screening rates. IMPACT: A relatively simple intervention could have a strong impact in breast cancer prevention in underserved communities. (c)2010 AACR.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Breast cancer is the cancer with the highest incidence among women in Chile and in many Latin American countries. Breast cancer screening has very low compliance among Chilean women. METHODS: We compared the effects on mammography screening rates of standard care, of a low-intensity intervention based on mail contact, and of a high-intensity intervention based on mail plus telephone or personal contact. A random sample of 500 women with the age of 50 to 70 years registered at a community clinic in Santiago who had not had a mammogram in the past 2 years were randomly assigned to one of the three intervention groups. Six months after randomization, participants were re-evaluated for their compliance with mammography screening. The outcome was measured by self-report and by electronic clinical records. An intention to treat model was used to analyze the results. RESULTS: Between 92% and 93% of participants completed the study. Based on electronic records, mammography screening rates increased significantly from 6% in the control group to 51.8% in the low-intensity group and 70.1% in the high-intensity group. About 14% of participants in each group received opportunistic advice, 100% of participants in the low- and high-intensity groups received the mail contact, and 50% in the high-intensity group received a telephone or personal contact. CONCLUSION: A primary care intervention based on mail or brief personal contact could significantly improve mammogram screening rates. IMPACT: A relatively simple intervention could have a strong impact in breast cancer prevention in underserved communities. (c)2010 AACR.
Authors: Kris Denhaerynck; Emmanuel Lesaffre; Jo Baele; Kaat Cortebeeck; Eef Van Overstraete; Frank Buntinx Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: John R Scheel; Yamile Molina; Gloria Coronado; Sonia Bishop; Sarah Doty; Ricardo Jimenez; Beti Thompson; Constance D Lehman; Shirley A A Beresford Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2017-01-01 Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Matthew P Banegas; Klaus Püschel; Javiera Martínez-Gutiérrez; Jennifer C Anderson; Beti Thompson Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2012-07-26 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Klaus Puschel; Andrea Rioseco; Gabriela Soto; Mario Palominos; Augusto León; Mauricio Soto; Beti Thompson Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-07-31 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Senshuang Zheng; Xiaorui Zhang; Marcel J W Greuter; Geertruida H de Bock; Wenli Lu Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-23 Impact factor: 3.390