Literature DB >> 31969343

Economic Evaluation of Tailored Web versus Tailored Telephone-Based Interventions to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening among Women.

David R Lairson1, Tong Han Chung2, Danmeng Huang2, Timothy E Stump3, Patrick O Monahan3,4, Shannon M Christy5,6,7, Susan M Rawl4,8, Victoria L Champion4,8.   

Abstract

Screening for colorectal cancer is cost-effective, but many U.S. women are nonadherent, and the cost-effectiveness of web-based tailored screening interventions is unknown. A randomized controlled trial, COBRA (Increasing Colorectal and Breast Cancer Screening), was the source of information for the economic evaluation. COBRA compared screening among a Usual Care group to: (i) tailored Phone Counseling intervention; (ii) tailored Web intervention; and (iii) tailored Web + Phone intervention groups. A sample of 1,196 women aged 50 to 75 who were nonadherent to colorectal cancer screening were recruited from Indiana primary care clinics during 2013 to 2015. Screening status was obtained through medical records at recruitment with verbal confirmation at consent, and at 6-month follow-up via medical record audit and participant self-report. A "best sample" analysis and microcosting from the patient and provider perspectives were applied to estimate the costs and effects of the interventions. Statistical uncertainty was analyzed with nonparametric bootstrapping and net benefit regression analysis. The per participant cost of implementing the Phone Counseling, Web-based, and Web + Phone Counseling interventions was $277, $314, and $336, respectively. The incremental cost per person screened for the Phone Counseling compared with no intervention was $995, while the additional cost of Web and the Web + Phone compared with Phone Counseling did not yield additonal persons screened. Tailored Phone Counseling significantly increased colorectal cancer screening rates compared with Usual Care. Tailored Web interventions did not improve the screening rate compared with the lower cost Phone Counseling intervention. ©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31969343      PMCID: PMC8802485          DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-19-0376

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)        ISSN: 1940-6215


  29 in total

1.  Adherence to colorectal cancer screening in an HMO population.

Authors:  R E Myers; B J Trock; C Lerman; T Wolf; E Ross; P F Engstrom
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 4.018

2.  Effects of Temporal Framing on Response to Antismoking Messages: The Mediating Role of Perceived Relevance.

Authors:  Xiaoquan Zhao; Emily Peterson
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2016-12-21

3.  Estimating development cost of an interactive website based cancer screening promotion program.

Authors:  David R Lairson; Tong Han Chung; Lisa G Smith; Jeffrey K Springston; Victoria L Champion
Journal:  Eval Program Plann       Date:  2015-02-23

4.  Patient navigation to increase colorectal cancer screening among Latino Medicare enrollees: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  K R Enard; L Nevarez; M Hernandez; S R Hovick; M R Moguel; R A Hajek; C E Blinka; L A Jones; I Torres-Vigil
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 2.506

5.  Colorectal cancer screening in older men and women: qualitative research findings and implications for intervention.

Authors:  C Beeker; J M Kraft; B G Southwell; C M Jorgensen
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2000-06

6.  Costing behavioral interventions: a practical guide to enhance translation.

Authors:  Debra P Ritzwoller; Anna Sukhanova; Bridget Gaglio; Russell E Glasgow
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2009-03-17

7.  Cost-effectiveness of targeted and tailored interventions on colorectal cancer screening use.

Authors:  David R Lairson; Melissa DiCarlo; Ronald E Myers; Thomas Wolf; James Cocroft; Randa Sifri; Michael Rosenthal; Sally W Vernon; Richard Wender
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-02-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Comparative effectiveness of fecal immunochemical test outreach, colonoscopy outreach, and usual care for boosting colorectal cancer screening among the underserved: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Samir Gupta; Ethan A Halm; Don C Rockey; Marcia Hammons; Mark Koch; Elizabeth Carter; Luisa Valdez; Liyue Tong; Chul Ahn; Michael Kashner; Keith Argenbright; Jasmin Tiro; Zhuo Geng; Sandi Pruitt; Celette Sugg Skinner
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2013-10-14       Impact factor: 21.873

Review 9.  A cost-effectiveness analysis of a colorectal cancer screening program in safety net clinics.

Authors:  Richard T Meenan; Gloria D Coronado; Amanda Petrik; Beverly B Green
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2019-01-24       Impact factor: 4.018

10.  A Randomized Trial to Compare a Tailored Web-Based Intervention and Tailored Phone Counseling to Usual Care for Increasing Colorectal Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Victoria L Champion; Shannon M Christy; William Rakowski; Wambui G Gathirua-Mwangi; Will L Tarver; Lisa Carter-Harris; Andrea A Cohee; Andrew R Marley; Nenette M Jessup; Erika Biederman; Carla D Kettler; Timothy E Stump; Patrick Monahan; David R Lairson; Susan M Rawl
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2018-09-04       Impact factor: 4.254

View more
  1 in total

1.  Economic Evaluation of Web- versus Telephone-based Interventions to Simultaneously Increase Colorectal and Breast Cancer Screening Among Women.

Authors:  Danmeng Huang; David R Lairson; Tong H Chung; Patrick O Monahan; Susan M Rawl; Victoria L Champion
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2021-07-09
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.