BACKGROUND: Sending faecal occult blood tests (FOBT) by mail has been proposed both as a method to increase participation and a way to reduce staff costs in colorectal cancer screening. METHODS: Two multicentre randomized controlled trials (ISRCTN10351276) were performed: one randomly assigned 3196 individuals who had previously participated in colorectal screening to receive aFOBT kit at home or a standard invitation; in the second, 4219 people aged 50-69 years who did not respond to a screening invitation were either sent aFOBT or a standard recall letter. The cost per returned kit was calculated in each arm. RESULTS: Participation was higher with direct FOBT mailing in both trials: relative risk 1.11 (95% CI 1.06-1.17) and 1.36 (95% CI 1.16-1.60) for previous responders and non-responders, respectively. The cost per returned kit for previous responders ranged from 4.24€ to 16.10€, and from 3.29€ to 7.36€ with FOBT mailing and standard invitation, respectively, not including staff costs; for non-responders it ranged from 17.13€ to 46.80€, and from 7.36€ to 18.30€ with FOBT mailing and standard recall, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The FOBT mailing strategy modestly increased participation. This method can be used on a population of previous responders to reduce personnel costs and workload. When used as a reminder to non-responders, this method increases costs.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Sending faecal occult blood tests (FOBT) by mail has been proposed both as a method to increase participation and a way to reduce staff costs in colorectal cancer screening. METHODS: Two multicentre randomized controlled trials (ISRCTN10351276) were performed: one randomly assigned 3196 individuals who had previously participated in colorectal screening to receive a FOBT kit at home or a standard invitation; in the second, 4219 people aged 50-69 years who did not respond to a screening invitation were either sent a FOBT or a standard recall letter. The cost per returned kit was calculated in each arm. RESULTS: Participation was higher with direct FOBT mailing in both trials: relative risk 1.11 (95% CI 1.06-1.17) and 1.36 (95% CI 1.16-1.60) for previous responders and non-responders, respectively. The cost per returned kit for previous responders ranged from 4.24€ to 16.10€, and from 3.29€ to 7.36€ with FOBT mailing and standard invitation, respectively, not including staff costs; for non-responders it ranged from 17.13€ to 46.80€, and from 7.36€ to 18.30€ with FOBT mailing and standard recall, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The FOBT mailing strategy modestly increased participation. This method can be used on a population of previous responders to reduce personnel costs and workload. When used as a reminder to non-responders, this method increases costs.
Authors: Briton Lee; Shreya Patel; Carly Rachocki; Rachel Issaka; Eric Vittinghoff; Jean A Shapiro; Uri Ladabaum; Ma Somsouk Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-08-03 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Giridhar Mohan; Sajal K Chattopadhyay; Donatus U Ekwueme; Susan A Sabatino; Devon L Okasako-Schmucker; Yinan Peng; Shawna L Mercer; Anilkrishna B Thota Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2019-08-30 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: P Giorgi Rossi; C Fortunato; P Barbarino; S Boveri; S Caroli; A Del Mistro; A Ferro; C Giammaria; M Manfredi; T Moretto; A Pasquini; M Sideri; M C Tufi; C Cogo; E Altobelli Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2015-01-29 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Jill Tinmouth; Nancy N Baxter; Lawrence F Paszat; Linda Rabeneck; Rinku Sutradhar; Lingsong Yun Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2014-03-12 Impact factor: 2.692