Literature DB >> 30104327

Effectiveness of reminder strategies on cancer screening adherence: a randomised controlled trial.

Martin Cs Wong1, Jessica Yl Ching2, Junjie Huang3, John Ct Wong2, Thomas Yt Lam2, Victor Cw Chan2, Simpson Kc Ng2, Zero Hui2, Arthur Kc Luk2, Justin Cy Wu4, Francis Kl Chan4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated the different recalling approaches for enhancing adherence to faecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening. AIM: The authors evaluated the effectiveness of two telecommunication strategies on improving adherence to yearly FIT screening. DESIGN AND
SETTING: A randomised, parallel group trial was performed in a primary care screening practice.
METHOD: The authors recruited 629 asymptomatic individuals aged 40-70 years with a negative FIT in 2015 to a population-based screening programme. On participation, they were invited to repeat their second round of FIT in 2016, 12 months after the first test. Each participant was randomly assigned to either interactive telephone reminder (n = 207), short message service reminder (SMS, n = 212), or control, where no additional interventions were delivered after the findings of their first FIT was communicated to the participants (n = 210). Reminders in the intervention groups were delivered 1 month before subjects' expected return. Additional telephone reminders were delivered 2 months after the expected return date to all subjects who defaulted specimen return. The outcomes included rates of FIT collection and specimen return up to 6 months after their expected return.
RESULTS: At 6 months, the cumulative FIT collection rate was 95.1%, 90.4%, and 86.5%, respectively, for the telephone, SMS, and control groups (P = 0.010). The corresponding specimen return rate was 94.1%, 90.0%, and 86.0% (P = 0.022). When compared with the control, only subjects in the telephone group were significantly more likely to collect FIT tubes (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 3.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.50 to 6.75, P = 0.003) and return completed specimens (AOR = 2.73, 95% CI = 1.35 to 5.53, P = 0.005).
CONCLUSION: Interactive telephone reminders are effective at securing previously screened subjects to repeat screening 1 year after a negative finding. © British Journal of General Practice 2018.

Entities:  

Keywords:  adherence; colorectal cancer; screening; short message service; telecommunications; telephone reminders

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30104327      PMCID: PMC6104889          DOI: 10.3399/bjgp18X698369

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  30 in total

1.  Participation in screening for colorectal cancer based on a faecal occult blood test is improved by endorsement by the primary care practitioner.

Authors:  S R Cole; G P Young; D Byrne; J R Guy; J Morcom
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.136

2.  Pre-notification increases uptake of colorectal cancer screening in all demographic groups: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Gillian Libby; Jane Bray; Jennifer Champion; Linda A Brownlee; Janice Birrell; Dermot R Gorman; Emilia M Crighton; Callum G Fraser; Robert J C Steele
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 2.136

3.  Invitation strategies for colorectal cancer screening programmes: The impact of an advance notification letter.

Authors:  Carlo Senore; Andrea Ederle; Giovanni DePretis; Corrado Magnani; Debora Canuti; Silvia Deandrea; Manuel Zorzi; Alessandra Barca; Piero Bestagini; Katia Faitini; Luigi Bisanti; Coralba Casale; Antonio Ferro; Paolo GiorgiRossi; Francesco Quadrino; Giorgia Fiorina; Arianna Capuano; Nereo Segnan; Alberto Fantin
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2015-01-17       Impact factor: 4.018

4.  Association of Interactive Reminders and Automated Messages With Persistent Adherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Martin C S Wong; Jessica Y L Ching; Thomas Y T Lam; Simpson K C Ng; John C T Wong; Justin C Y Wu; Francis K L Chan
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 31.777

5.  Use of interactive voice response to improve colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Hannah Cohen-Cline; Karen J Wernli; Susan C Bradford; Mary Boles-Hall; David C Grossman
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Screening for Colorectal Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Authors:  Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo; David C Grossman; Susan J Curry; Karina W Davidson; John W Epling; Francisco A R García; Matthew W Gillman; Diane M Harper; Alex R Kemper; Alex H Krist; Ann E Kurth; C Seth Landefeld; Carol M Mangione; Douglas K Owens; William R Phillips; Maureen G Phipps; Michael P Pignone; Albert L Siu
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Prospective cohort study of compliance with faecal immunochemical tests for colorectal cancer screening in Hong Kong.

Authors:  Martin C S Wong; Jessica Y L Ching; Thomas Y T Lam; Arthur K C Luk; Hoyee W Hirai; Sian M Griffiths; Francis K L Chan; Joseph J Y Sung
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2013-05-31       Impact factor: 4.018

8.  An advance notification letter increases participation in colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  S R Cole; A Smith; C Wilson; D Turnbull; A Esterman; G P Young
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.136

9.  Population-based screening for colorectal cancer using an immunochemical faecal occult blood test: a comparison of two invitation strategies.

Authors:  Sofie Van Roosbroeck; Sarah Hoeck; Guido Van Hal
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2012-05-05       Impact factor: 2.984

10.  Primary care endorsement letter and a patient leaflet to improve participation in colorectal cancer screening: results of a factorial randomised trial.

Authors:  P Hewitson; A M Ward; C Heneghan; S P Halloran; D Mant
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2011-08-09       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  1 in total

1.  Does theory of planned behaviour play a role in predicting uptake of colorectal cancer screening? A cross-sectional study in Hong Kong.

Authors:  Junjie Huang; Jingxuan Wang; Tiffany Wing-Yin Pang; Maggie Ka-Ying Chan; Sophia Leung; Xiao Chen; Colette Leung; Zhi-Jie Zheng; Martin Chi-Sang Wong
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-08-06       Impact factor: 2.692

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.