Literature DB >> 28452044

Implementation and process evaluation of three interventions to promote screening mammograms delivered for 4 years in a large primary care population.

Roger Luckmann1, Mary Jo White2, Mary E Costanza3, Christine F Frisard2, Caroline Cranos3, Susan Sama4, Robert Yood5.   

Abstract

The optimal form of outreach to promote repeated, on time screening mammograms in primary care has not been established. The purpose of this study is to assess the implementation process and process outcomes for three interventions for promoting biannual screening mammography in a randomized trial. In a large urban primary care practice over a 4-year period, we randomized women aged 40-85 and eligible for mammograms to three interventions: reminder letter only (LO), reminder letter + reminder call (RC), and reminder letter + counseling call (CC). We tracked information system development, staff training, patient and provider recruitment, reach, dose delivered and received, fidelity, and context measures. Ninety-three of 95 providers approved participation by 80% (23,999) of age-eligible patients, of whom only 207 (0.9%) opted not to receive any intervention. Of 9161 initial reminder letters mailed to women coming due or overdue for mammograms, 0.8% were undeliverable. Of women in the RC and CC arms unresponsive to the first reminder letter (n = 3982), 71.4% were called and reached, and of those, 49.1% scheduled a mammogram. Only 33.4% of women reached in the CC arm received full counseling, and women in the CC arm were less likely to schedule a mammogram than those in the RC arm. Implementing mail and telephone mammography reminders is feasible and acceptable in a large urban practice and reaches a majority of patients. Many schedule a mammogram when reached. A reminder letter followed by a simple reminder call if needed may be the optimal approach to promoting screening mammograms.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Mammogram; Reminder system; Screening; Telephone counseling

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28452044      PMCID: PMC5645284          DOI: 10.1007/s13142-017-0497-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transl Behav Med        ISSN: 1613-9860            Impact factor:   3.046


  16 in total

Review 1.  Motivational interviewing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sune Rubak; Annelli Sandbaek; Torsten Lauritzen; Bo Christensen
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 2.  A model of the precaution adoption process: evidence from home radon testing.

Authors:  N D Weinstein; P M Sandman
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 4.267

3.  Recruitment to mammography screening: a randomised trial and meta-analysis of invitation letters and telephone calls.

Authors:  Andrew Page; Stephen Morrell; Clayton Chiu; Richard Taylor; Richard Tewson
Journal:  Aust N Z J Public Health       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 2.939

4.  Modeling the impact of population screening on breast cancer mortality in the United States.

Authors:  Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Kathleen A Cronin; Donald A Berry; Yaojen Chang; Harry J de Koning; Sandra J Lee; Sylvia K Plevritis; Clyde B Schechter; Natasha K Stout; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Marvin Zelen; Eric J Feuer
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 4.380

5.  Implementing a computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) system to increase colorectal cancer screening: a process evaluation.

Authors:  Mary Jo White; Jennifer R Stark; Roger Luckmann; Milagros C Rosal; Lynn Clemow; Mary E Costanza
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2005-07-01

6.  Telephone counseling and attendance in a national mammography-screening program a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Katrin Hegenscheid; Wolfgang Hoffmann; Sebastian Fochler; Martin Domin; Stefan Weiss; Birgit Hartmann; Ulrich Bick; Norbert Hosten
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 5.043

7.  Factors associated with repeat mammography screening.

Authors:  S Halabi; C S Skinner; G P Samsa; T S Strigo; Y S Crawford; B K Rimer
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 0.493

8.  Using tailored telephone counseling to accelerate the adoption of colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Mary E Costanza; Roger Luckmann; Anne M Stoddard; Mary Jo White; Jennifer R Stark; Jill S Avrunin; Milagros C Rosal; Lynn Clemow
Journal:  Cancer Detect Prev       Date:  2007-07-23

9.  A randomized trial of telephone counseling to promote screening mammography in two HMOs.

Authors:  Roger Luckmann; Judith A Savageau; Lynn Clemow; Anne M Stoddard; Mary E Costanza
Journal:  Cancer Detect Prev       Date:  2003

10.  Prediction of higher mortality reduction for the UK Breast Screening Frequency Trial: a model-based approach on screening intervals.

Authors:  N T van Ravesteyn; E A M Heijnsdijk; G Draisma; H J de Koning
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2011-08-23       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.