Samir Gupta1,2, Stacie Miller3, Mark Koch3, Emily Berry4, Paula Anderson5, Sandi L Pruitt5,6, Eric Borton6, Amy E Hughes6, Elizabeth Carter3, Sylvia Hernandez3, Helen Pozos3, Ethan A Halm5,6,7, Ayelet Gneezy8, Alicea J Lieberman8, Celette Sugg Skinner5,6, Keith Argenbright4,5,6, Bijal Balasubramanian5,9. 1. San Diego Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, San Diego, California, USA. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, and the Moores Cancer Center, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA. 3. Department of Family Medicine, John Peter Smith Health Network, Fort Worth, Texas, USA. 4. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Moncrief Cancer Institute, Fort Worth, Texas, USA. 5. University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. 6. Department of Clinical Sciences, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. 7. Department of Internal Medicine, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. 8. Rady School of Management, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA. 9. Department of Epidemiology, Genetics, & Environmental Science, University of Texas School of Public Health Dallas Regional Campus, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Offering financial incentives to promote or "nudge" participation in cancer screening programs, particularly among vulnerable populations who traditionally have lower rates of screening, has been suggested as a strategy to enhance screening uptake. However, effectiveness of such practices has not been established. Our aim was to determine whether offering small financial incentives would increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening completion in a low-income, uninsured population. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, comparative effectiveness trial among primary care patients, aged 50-64 years, not up-to-date with CRC screening served by a large, safety net health system in Fort Worth, Texas. Patients were randomly assigned to mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach (n=6,565), outreach plus a $5 incentive (n=1,000), or outreach plus a $10 incentive (n=1,000). Outreach included reminder phone calls and navigation to promote diagnostic colonoscopy completion for patients with abnormal FIT. Primary outcome was FIT completion within 1 year, assessed using an intent-to-screen analysis. RESULTS:FIT completion was 36.9% with vs. 36.2% without any financial incentive (P=0.60) and was also not statistically different for the $10 incentive (34.6%, P=0.32 vs. no incentive) or $5 incentive (39.2%, P=0.07 vs. no incentive) groups. Results did not differ substantially when stratified by age, sex, race/ethnicity, or neighborhood poverty rate. Median time to FIT return also did not differ across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Financial incentives, in the amount of $5 or $10 offered in exchange for responding to mailed invitation to complete FIT, do not impact CRC screening completion.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: Offering financial incentives to promote or "nudge" participation in cancer screening programs, particularly among vulnerable populations who traditionally have lower rates of screening, has been suggested as a strategy to enhance screening uptake. However, effectiveness of such practices has not been established. Our aim was to determine whether offering small financial incentives would increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening completion in a low-income, uninsured population. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, comparative effectiveness trial among primary care patients, aged 50-64 years, not up-to-date with CRC screening served by a large, safety net health system in Fort Worth, Texas. Patients were randomly assigned to mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach (n=6,565), outreach plus a $5 incentive (n=1,000), or outreach plus a $10 incentive (n=1,000). Outreach included reminder phone calls and navigation to promote diagnostic colonoscopy completion for patients with abnormal FIT. Primary outcome was FIT completion within 1 year, assessed using an intent-to-screen analysis. RESULTS: FIT completion was 36.9% with vs. 36.2% without any financial incentive (P=0.60) and was also not statistically different for the $10 incentive (34.6%, P=0.32 vs. no incentive) or $5 incentive (39.2%, P=0.07 vs. no incentive) groups. Results did not differ substantially when stratified by age, sex, race/ethnicity, or neighborhood poverty rate. Median time to FIT return also did not differ across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Financial incentives, in the amount of $5 or $10 offered in exchange for responding to mailed invitation to complete FIT, do not impact CRC screening completion.
Authors: Samir Gupta; Daniel A Sussman; Chyke A Doubeni; Daniel S Anderson; Lukejohn Day; Amar R Deshpande; B Joseph Elmunzer; Adeyinka O Laiyemo; Jeanette Mendez; Ma Somsouk; James Allison; Taft Bhuket; Zhuo Geng; Beverly B Green; Steven H Itzkowitz; Maria Elena Martinez Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Erin G Stone; Sally C Morton; Marlies E Hulscher; Margaret A Maglione; Elizabeth A Roth; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Brian S Mittman; Lisa V Rubenstein; Laurence Z Rubenstein; Paul G Shekelle Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2002-05-07 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Ronald E Myers; Randa Sifri; Terry Hyslop; Michael Rosenthal; Sally W Vernon; James Cocroft; Thomas Wolf; Jocelyn Andrel; Richard Wender Journal: Cancer Date: 2007-11-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Samantha Hendren; Paul Winters; Sharon Humiston; Amna Idris; Shirley X L Li; Patricia Ford; Raymond Specht; Stephen Marcus; Michael Mendoza; Kevin Fiscella Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2013-07-02 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Susan A Sabatino; Mary C White; Trevor D Thompson; Carrie N Klabunde Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2015-05-08 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Zhaomin Xu; Adan Z Becerra; Christopher T Aquina; Bradley J Hensley; Carla F Justiniano; Courtney Boodry; Alex A Swanger; Reza Arsalanizadeh; Katia Noyes; John R Monson; Fergal J Fleming Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Shivan J Mehta; Jordyn Feingold; Matthew Vandertuyn; Tess Niewood; Catherine Cox; Chyke A Doubeni; Kevin G Volpp; David A Asch Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2017-07-20 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Michael K Dougherty; Alison T Brenner; Seth D Crockett; Shivani Gupta; Stephanie B Wheeler; Manny Coker-Schwimmer; Laura Cubillos; Teri Malo; Daniel S Reuland Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 21.873