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

Screening for colorectal and breast cancer is considered cost effective, but limited evidence exists on cost-effectiveness of screening promotion interventions that simultaneously target both cancers. Increasing Colorectal and Breast Cancer Screening (Project COBRA), a randomized controlled trial conducted in the community, examined the cost-effectiveness of an innovative tailored web-based intervention compared with tailored telephone counseling and usual care. Screening status at 6 months was obtained by participant surveys plus medical record reviews. Cost was prospectively measured from the patient and provider perspectives using time logs and project invoices. Relative efficiency of the interventions was quantified by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Nonparametric bootstrapping and net benefit regression analysis were used to assess statistical uncertainty of the results. The average cost per participant to implement the Phone counseling, Web-based, and Web + Phone counseling interventions were $277, $314, and $337, respectively. Comparing Phone counseling with usual care resulted in an additional cost of $300 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $283-$320) per cancer screening test and $421 (95% CI: $400-$441) per additional person screened in the target population. Phone counseling alone was more cost-effective than the Web + Phone intervention. Web-based intervention alone was more costly but less effective than the Phone counseling. When simultaneously promoting screening for both colorectal and breast cancer the Web-based intervention was less cost-effective compared with Phone and Web + Phone strategies. The results suggest that targeting multiple cancer screening may improve the cost-effectiveness of cancer screening interventions. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: This study informs researchers, decision makers, healthcare providers, and payers about the improved cost-effectiveness of targeting multiple cancer screenings for cancer early detection programs.

Effect of a Smart Pill Bottle and Pharmacist Intervention on Medication Adherence in Patients with Multiple Myeloma New to Lenalidomide Therapy.

BACKGROUND: U.S. specialty drug spend is expected to reach $400 billion by 2020, with significant growth in oncology. New oral oncology approvals have allowed for more convenient outpatient administration compared with physician-administered chemotherapies; however, patients may encounter challenges with adherence when taking medications at home. Emerging medication adherence technology (MAT) attempts to provide at-home adherence support, and while one such technology, smart pill bottles (SPB), claims to improve medication adherence, few studies have formally assessed their effects. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of an SPB with pharmacist intervention on medication adherence in adult patients with multiple myeloma (MM) new to lenalidomide therapy (≤ 5 cycle dispenses). Secondary objectives were to evaluate treatment cycles completed, evaluate the significance of real-time pharmacist engagement (intervention group only), determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and evaluate patient satisfaction and likelihood to use an SPB. METHODS: This prospective, random assignment, single-site, and single-blinded study recruited 40 adult patients diagnosed with MM new to lenalidomide at a specialty pharmacy. Recruitment was completed January-February 2016, and the length of study was 6 months. Participants were randomized 1:1 between the intervention and control groups. The intervention group received lenalidomide in activated SPBs with light, chimes, text message reminders, and pharmacist follow-up if weekly SPB adherence rates dropped below 80%. The control group received lenalidomide in identical SPBs with all alerts deactivated. SBPs contained cellular capabilities, enabling around-the-clock data transmission and captured data upon bottle-uncapping events. Patient adherence was calculated by dividing the number of bottle-uncapping events by the total number of doses supplied for each dosing cycle. Lenalidomide cycles completed and pharmacist outreach to the same patient were counted to determine pharmacist intervention. The ICER was calculated to determine SPB cost-effectiveness, and a Likert scale survey was given to the intervention group to evaluate patient satisfaction with the full-service SPB. RESULTS: Sixteen participants in each arm completed the study; 4 patients in each arm were lost to follow-up. Median adherence was improved for the intervention group compared with the control group (median = 100% vs. 87.4%; P = 0.001). The ICER per patient percentage adherence increase was found to be $96.03. Sixty percent of patients in the intervention group who responded to the post-satisfaction survey rated the full SPB service very positively. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, SPB interventions were associated with increased medication adherence and patient satisfaction. This pilot also provides empirical data on the cost-effectiveness of adherence technology used in a specialty pharmacy oncology setting. DISCLOSURES: This study was supported by Avella Specialty Pharmacy and AdhereTech. All authors are employees of Avella; Eric Sredzinski was an option holder of Avella; and none of the Avella authors had a financial interest in AdhereTech. AdhereTech provided the SPBs and data services for the duration of this study. The authors report no other potential conflicts of interest. Interim study data were presented at the 2016 Southwestern States Residency Conference (SSRC) on June 20, 2016, in Phoenix, AZ.

Economic evaluation of the cost of different methods of retesting chlamydia positive individuals in England.

OBJECTIVES: The National Chlamydia Screening Programme (NCSP) in England opportunistically screens eligible individuals for chlamydia infection. Retesting is recommended three3 months after treatment following a positive test result, but no guidance is given on how local areas should recall individuals for retesting. Here , we compare cost estimates for different recall methods to inform the optimal delivery of retesting programmes. DESIGN: Economic evaluation. SETTING: England. METHODS: We estimated the cost of chlamydia retesting for each of the six most commonly used recall methods in 2014 based on existing cost estimates of a chlamydia screen. Proportions accepting retesting, opting for retesting by post, returning postal testing kits and retesting positive were informed by 2014 NCSP audit data. Health professionals 'sense-checked' the costs. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Cost and adjusted cost per chlamydia retest; cost and adjusted cost per chlamydia retest positive. RESULTS: We estimated the cost of the chlamydia retest pathway, including treatment/follow-up call, to be between £45 and £70 per completed test. At the lower end, this compared favourably to the cost of a clinic-based screen. Cost per retest positive was £389-£607. After adjusting for incomplete uptake, and non-return of postal kits, the cost rose to £109-£289 per completed test (cost per retest positive: £946-£2,506). The most economical method in terms of adjusted cost per retest was no active recall as gains in retest rates with active recall did not outweigh the higher cost. Nurse-led client contact by phone was particularly uneconomical, as was sending out postal testing kits automatically. CONCLUSIONS: Retesting without active recall is more economical than more intensive methods such as recalling by phone and automatically sending out postal kits. If sending a short message service (SMS) could be automated, this could be the most economical way of delivering retesting. However, patient choice and local accessibility of services should be taken into consideration in planning.

A 4-year randomized trial comparing three outreach interventions to promote screening mammograms.

As population health has become a focus of health care payers and providers, interest has grown in mail, phone, and other forms of outreach for improving population rates of cancer screening. Translational research is needed to compare the effectiveness and cost of low- and high-intensity behavioral outreach interventions for promoting cancer screening. The purpose of the article is to compare the effectiveness in promoting biannual mammograms of three interventions delivered over 4 years to a primary care population with a high baseline mammography adherence of 83.3%. We randomized women aged 40-84 to reminder letter only (LO arm), letter + reminder call (RC arm), and two letters + counseling call (CC arm) involving tailored education and motivational interviewing. Mammography adherence (≥1 mammogram in the previous 24 months) at four time points was determined from insurance claims records. Over 4 years, 30,162 women were randomized. At the end of 4 years, adherence was highest in the RC arm (83.0%) compared with CC (80.8%) and LO (80.8%) arms (p = .03). Only 23.5% of women in the CC arm were reached and accepted full counseling. The incremental cost per additional mammogram for RC arm women was $30.45 over the LO arm cost. A simple reminder call can increase screening mammogram adherence even when baseline adherence is high. Some more complex behavioral interventions delivered by mail and phone as in this study may be less effective, due to limited participation of patients, a focus on ambivalence, lack of follow-up, and other factors.

Evaluation of patient-focused interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening among new york state medicaid managed care patients.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate an ongoing initiative to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake in the New York State (NYS) Medicaid managed care population. METHODS: Patients aged 50 to 75 years who were not up to date with CRC screening and resided in 2 NYS regions were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 cohorts: no mailed reminder, mailed reminder, and mailed reminder + incentive (in the form of a $25 cash card). Screening prevalence and the costs of the intervention were summarized. RESULTS: In total, 7123 individuals in the Adirondack Region and 10,943 in the Central Region (including the Syracuse metropolitan area) were included. Screening prevalence in the Adirondack Region was 7.2% in the mailed reminder + incentive cohort, 7.0% in the mailed reminder cohort, and 5.8% in the no mailed reminder cohort. In the Central Region, screening prevalence was 7.2% in the mailed reminder cohort, 6.9% in the mailed reminder + incentive cohort, and 6.5% in the no mailed reminder cohort. The cost of implementing interventions in the Central Region was approximately 53% lower than in the Adirondack Region. CONCLUSIONS: Screening uptake was low and did not differ significantly across the 2 regions or within the 3 cohorts. The incentive payment and mailed reminder did not appear to be effective in increasing CRC screening. The total cost of implementation was lower in the Central Region because of efficiencies generated from lessons learned during the first round of implementation in the Adirondack Region. More varied multicomponent interventions may be required to facilitate the completion of CRC screening among Medicaid beneficiaries.

Text4Heart II - improving medication adherence in people with heart disease: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is an essential component of contemporary management for patients with coronary heart disease, including following an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). CR typically involves education and support to assist people following an ACS to make lifestyle changes and prevent subsequent events. Despite its benefits, uptake and participation in tradition CR programs is low. The use of mobile technologies (mHealth) offers the potential to improve reach, access, and delivery of CR support. We aim to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a text-messaging intervention (Text4Heart II) to improve adherence to medication and lifestyle change in addition to usual care in people following an ACS. A second aim is to use the RE-AIM framework to inform the potential implementation of Text4Heart II within health services in New Zealand. METHODS: Text4Heart II is a two-arm, parallel, superiority randomized controlled trial conducted in two large metropolitan hospitals in Auckland, New Zealand. Three hundred and thirty participants will be randomized to either a 24-week theory- and evidence-based personalized text message program to support self-management in addition to usual CR, or usual CR alone (control). Outcomes are assessed at 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants adhering to medication at 6 months as measured by dispensed records. Secondary outcomes include medication adherence at 12 months, the proportion of participants adhering to self-reported healthy behaviors (physical activity, fruit and vegetable consumption, moderating alcohol intake and smoking status) measured using a composite health behavior score, self-reported medication adherence, cardiovascular risk factors (lipids, blood pressure), readmissions and related hospital events at 6 and 12 months. A cost-effectiveness analysis will also be conducted. Using the RE-AIM framework, we will determine uptake and sustainability of the intervention. DISCUSSION: The Text4Heart II trial will determine the effectiveness of a text-messaging intervention to improve adherence to medication and lifestyle behaviors at both 6 and 12 months. Using the RE-AIM framework this trial will provide much needed data and insight into the potential implementation of Text4Heart II. This trial addresses many limitations/criticisms of previous mHealth trials; it builds on our Text4Heart pilot trial, it is adequately powered, has sufficient duration to elicit behavior change, and the follow-up assessments (6 and 12 months) are long enough to determine the sustained effect of the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ID: ACTRN12616000422426 . Registered retrospectively on 1 April 2016.

Text messages to increase attendance to follow-up cervical cancer screening appointments among HPV-positive Tanzanian women (Connected2Care): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is a major health concern in Tanzania, caused by poor attendance for cervical cancer screening and follow-up of women at risk. Mobile telephone health interventions are proven effective tools to improve health behaviour in African countries. So far, no knowledge exists on how such interventions may perform in relation to cervical cancer screening in low-income settings. This study aims to assess the degree to which a Short Message Service (SMS) intervention can increase attendance at appointments among women who have tested positive for high-risk (HR) Human Papillomavirus (HPV) during cervical cancer screening. METHODS/DESIGN: Connected2Care is a non-blinded, multicentre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. Tanzanian women testing positive to HR HPV at inclusion are randomly assigned in an allocation ratio of 1:1 to the SMS intervention or the control group (standard care). In a period of 10 months, the intervention group will receive 15 one-directional health educative text messages and SMS reminders for their appointment. The total sample size will be 700 with 350 women in each study arm. Primary outcome is attendance rate for follow-up. Secondary objectives are cost-effectiveness, measured through incremental ratios, and knowledge of cervical cancer by a 16-item true/false scale questionnaire at baseline and follow-up. Barriers against implementing the intervention will be assessed in a mixed-methods sub-population study. DISCUSSION: This study may provide information on the potential effects, costs, and barriers in implementing an SMS intervention targeting a group of women who are followed up after testing positive for HR HPV and are, therefore, at increased risk of developing cervical cancer. This can guide decision-makers on the effective use of mobile technology in a low-income setting. Trial status: recruiting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02509702 . Registered on 15 June 2015.

Costs of promoting cancer screening: Evidence from CDC's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP).

The Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) provided funding to 29 grantees to increase colorectal cancer screening. We describe the screening promotion costs of CRCCP grantees to evaluate the extent to which the program model resulted in the use of funding to support interventions recommended by the Guide to Community Preventive Services (Community Guide). We analyzed expenditures for screening promotion for the first three years of the CRCCP to assess cost per promotion strategy, and estimated the cost per person screened at the state level based on various projected increases in screening rates. All grantees engaged in small media activities and more than 90% used either client reminders, provider assessment and feedback, or patient navigation. Based on all expenditures, projected cost per eligible person screened for a 1%, 5%, and 10% increase in state-level screening proportions are $172, $34, and $17, respectively. CRCCP grantees expended the majority of their funding on Community Guide recommended screening promotion strategies but about a third was spent on other interventions. Based on this finding, future CRC programs should be provided with targeted education and information on evidence-based strategies, rather than broad based recommendations, to ensure that program funds are expended mainly on evidence-based interventions.

PLEASANT: Preventing and Lessening Exacerbations of Asthma in School-age children Associated with a New Term - a cluster randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Asthma episodes and deaths are known to be seasonal. A number of reports have shown peaks in asthma episodes in school-aged children associated with the return to school following the summer vacation. A fall in prescription collection in the month of August has been observed, and was associated with an increase in the number of unscheduled contacts after the return to school in September. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of the study was to assess whether or not a NHS-delivered public health intervention reduces the September peak in unscheduled medical contacts. DESIGN: Cluster randomised trial, with the unit of randomisation being 142 NHS general practices, and trial-based economic evaluation. SETTING: Primary care. INTERVENTION: A letter sent (n = 70 practices) in July from their general practitioner (GP) to parents/carers of school-aged children with asthma to remind them of the importance of taking their medication, and to ensure that they have sufficient medication prior to the start of the new school year in September. The control group received usual care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the proportion of children aged 5-16 years who had an unscheduled medical contact in September 2013. Supporting end points included the proportion of children who collected prescriptions in August 2013 and unscheduled contacts through the following 12 months. Economic end points were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained and costs from an NHS and Personal Social Services perspective. RESULTS: There is no evidence of effect in terms of unscheduled contacts in September. Among children aged 5-16 years, the odds ratio (OR) was 1.09 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96 to 1.25] against the intervention. The intervention did increase the proportion of children collecting a prescription in August (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.64) as well as scheduled contacts in the same month (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.52). For the wider time intervals (September-December 2013 and September-August 2014), there is weak evidence of the intervention reducing unscheduled contacts. The intervention did not reduce unscheduled care in September, although it succeeded in increasing the proportion of children collecting prescriptions in August as well as having scheduled contacts in the same month. These unscheduled contacts in September could be a result of the intervention, as GPs may have wanted to see patients before issuing a prescription. The economic analysis estimated a high probability that the intervention was cost-saving, for baseline-adjusted costs, across both base-case and sensitivity analyses. There was no increase in QALYs. LIMITATION: The use of routine data led to uncertainty in the coding of medical contacts. The uncertainty was mitigated by advice from a GP adjudication panel. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention did not reduce unscheduled care in September, although it succeeded in increasing the proportion of children both collecting prescriptions and having scheduled contacts in August. After September there is weak evidence in favour of the intervention. The intervention had a favourable impact on costs but did not demonstrate any impact on QALYs. The results of the trial indicate that further work is required on assessing and understanding adherence, both in terms of using routine data to make quantitative assessments, and through additional qualitative interviews with key stakeholders such as practice nurses, GPs and a wider group of children with asthma. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN03000938. FUNDING DETAILS: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 93. See the HTA programme website for further project information.

The effect of fines on nonattendance in public hospital outpatient clinics: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Nonattendance at scheduled appointments in public hospitals presents a challenge for efficient resource use and may ultimately affect health outcomes due to longer waiting times. Seven percent of all scheduled outpatient appointments in the United Kingdom are estimated to be nonattended. Various reminder systems have been shown to moderately reduce nonattendance, although the effect of issuing fines for nonattendance has not yet been tested in a randomized context. However, such use of financial incentives could impact access to care differently across the different socioeconomic groups. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of fines on hospital outpatient nonattendance. METHODS/DESIGN: A 1:1 randomized controlled trial of scheduled outpatient appointments was used, with follow-ups until the date of appointment. The setting is an orthopedic clinic at a regional hospital in Denmark. Appointments for users who are scheduled for diagnostics, treatment, surgery, or follow-ups were included from May 2015 to November 2015. Appointments assigned to the intervention arm include an attachment of the appointment letter explaining that a fine will be issued in the case of nonattendance without prior notice. Appointments assigned to the control arm follow usual practice (same system but no letter attachment). The primary outcome is the proportion of nonattendance. Secondary outcomes are proportions of cancellations, sociodemographics, and health-problem characteristics. Furthermore, the intervention costs and production value of nonattended appointments will be measured. An analysis of effect and cost-effectiveness will be conducted based on a 5 % significance level. DISCUSSION: The study is initiated and funded by the Danish Regions, which have the responsibility for the Danish public healthcare sector. The results are expected to inform future decisions about the introduction of fines for nonattendance at public hospitals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN61925912 . Registered on 6 July 2015.

The role of a nurse telephone call to prevent no-shows in endoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Preventing missed appointments, or "no-shows," is an important target in improving efficient patient care and lowering costs in gastrointestinal endoscopy practices. We aimed to investigate whether a nurse telephone call would reduce no-show rates for endoscopic appointments, and to determine if hiring and maintaining a nurse dedicated to pre-endoscopy phone calls is economically advantageous. Our secondary aim was to identify predictors of no-shows to endoscopy appointments. METHODS: We hired and trained a full-time licensed nurse to make a telephone call to patients 7 days before their scheduled upper endoscopy or colonoscopy. We compared this intervention with a previous reminder system involving mailed reminders. The effect of the intervention and impact of other predictors of no-shows were analyzed in 2 similar preintervention and postintervention patient cohorts. A mixed effects logistic regression model was used to estimate the association of the odds of being a no-show to the scheduled appointment and the characteristics of the patient and visit. An analysis of costs was performed that included the startup and maintenance costs of the intervention. RESULTS: We found that a nurse phone call was associated with a 33% reduction in the odds of a no-show visit (odds ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.91), adjusting for gender, age, partnered status, insurer type, distance from the endoscopy center, and visit type. The recovered reimbursement during the study period was $48,765, with net savings of $16,190 when accounting for the maintenance costs of the intervention; this resulted in a net revenue per annum of $43,173. CONCLUSIONS: We found that endoscopy practices may increase revenue, improve scheduling efficiency, and maximize resource utilization by hiring a nurse to reduce no-shows. Predictors of no-shows to endoscopy included unpartnered or single patients, commercial or managed care, being scheduled for colonoscopy as opposed to upper endoscopy, and being scheduled for a screening or surveillance colonoscopy.

Tailored message interventions versus typical messages for increasing participation in colorectal cancer screening among a non-adherent population: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness and cost-efficiency of a tailored message intervention compared with a non-tailored message intervention for increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates among a non-adherent population, in a community-based client reminder program. METHODS: After a baseline survey for psychological segmentation, 2140 eligible individuals were randomly assigned either to a group with a tailored matched-message condition (N = 356), a group with a non-tailored unmatched-message condition (N = 355), or to two control groups, one using a typical message with a professional design (N = 717) and one without a professional design (N = 712). The main outcome measure was attendance rates in a community-organized CRC screening program within five months of receiving a print reminder. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in fecal occult blood test (FOBT) attendance rates at follow-up assessments between the tailored matched-message condition (14.0 %) and the control (9.9 %; OR = 1.48, p = 0.026), while there was no significant difference between the unmatched-message condition (11.0 %) and the control (OR = 1.12, p = 0.558), and between the matched-message condition and the unmatched-message condition (OR = 1.32, p = 0.219). The cost of a one-person increase in FOBT screening was 3,740 JPY for the tailored matched-message condition, while it was 2,747 JPY for the control. CONCLUSIONS: A tailored-message intervention for segmented individuals designed to increase CRC screening rates in a community-based client reminder program was significantly effective compared to a usual reminder, but not more effective than an unmatched message in a randomized controlled trial, and was not sufficiently effective to highlight its value from a cost perspective. Therefore, the tailored intervention including target segmentation needs to be improved for future implementation in a CRC screening program for a non-adherent population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000004384 . Date of Registration: March 2011.

Reducing duplicate testing: a comparison of two clinical decision support tools.

OBJECTIVES: Unnecessary duplicate laboratory testing is common and costly. Systems-based means to avert unnecessary testing should be investigated and employed. METHODS: We compared the effectiveness and cost savings associated with two clinical decision support tools to stop duplicate testing. The Hard Stop required telephone contact with the laboratory and justification to have the duplicate test performed, whereas the Smart Alert allowed the provider to bypass the alert at the point of order entry without justification. RESULTS: The Hard Stop alert was significantly more effective than the Smart Alert (92.3% vs 42.6%, respectively; P < .0001). The cost savings realized per alert activation was $16.08/alert for the Hard Stop alert vs $3.52/alert for the Smart Alert. CONCLUSIONS: Structural and process changes that require laboratory contact and justification for duplicate testing are more effective than interventions that allow providers to bypass alerts without justification at point of computerized physician order entry.

Distributional cost-effectiveness analysis of health care programmes--a methodological case study of the UK Bowel Cancer Screening Programme.

This paper presents an application of a new methodological framework for undertaking distributional cost-effectiveness analysis to combine the objectives of maximising health and minimising unfair variation in health when evaluating population health interventions. The National Health Service bowel cancer screening programme introduced in 2006 is expected to improve population health on average and to worsen population health inequalities associated with deprivation and ethnicity--a classic case of 'intervention-generated inequality'. We demonstrate the distributional cost-effectiveness analysis framework by examining two redesign options for the bowel cancer screening programme: (i) the introduction of an enhanced targeted reminder aimed at increasing screening uptake in deprived and ethnically diverse neighbourhoods and (ii) the introduction of a basic universal reminder aimed at increasing screening uptake across the whole population. Our analysis indicates that the universal reminder is the strategy that maximises population health, while the targeted reminder is the screening strategy that minimises unfair variation in health. The framework is used to demonstrate how these two objectives can be traded off against each other, and how alternative social value judgements influence the assessment of which strategy is best, including judgements about which dimensions of health variation are considered unfair and judgements about societal levels of inequality aversion.

Use of text-message reminders to improve participation in a population-based breast cancer screening program.

To analyze the effect of a cell text message reminder service on participation in a mammogram screening program in Catalonia, Spain. A quasi-experimental design was used with women aged 50 to 69 years who had been scheduled mammogram appointments in June or July 2011. Women were personally invited by letter to attend to the breast cancer screening program (n = 12,786). Prior to the invitation, 3,719 (29.1 %) of them had provided their cell telephone number to the National Health Service. These women received a text message reminder 3 days before their scheduled appointment. Logistic regression models were used to analyze whether the text message reminder was associated with participation in screening. Cost-effectiveness of adding a text message reminder to the invitation letter was also analyzed. The overall rate of participation in breast cancer screening was 68.4 %. The participation rate was significantly higher in the text messaging group, with an age-adjusted OR of 1.56 (95 %CI: 1.43-1.70). A detailed analysis showed that the increase in participation related to the text message reminder was higher among women without previous screening who lived in areas where access to postal mail was limited (OR=2.85; 95 %CI: 2.31-3.53) compared to those who lived in areas of easier postal mail access (OR=1.66; 95 %CI: 1.36-2.02). The invitation letter+text message reminder was a cost-effective strategy. Text message reminders are an efficient cost-effective approach to improve participation in difficult-to-reach populations, such as rural areas and newly developed suburbs.

Cost effective analysis of recall methods for cervical cancer screening in Selangor--results from a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Cervical cancer screening in Malaysia is by opportunistic Pap smear which contributes to the low uptake rate. To overcome this, a pilot project called the SIPPS program (translated as information system of Pap smear program) had been introduced whereby women aged 20-65 years old are invited for Pap smear and receive recall to repeat the test. This study aimed at determining which recall method is most cost-effective in getting women to repeat Pap smear. A randomised control trial was conducted where one thousand women were recalled for repeat smear either by registered letter, phone messages, phone call or the usual postal letter. The total cost applied for cost-effectiveness analysis includes the cost of sending letter for first invitation, cost of the recall method and cost of two Pap smears. Cost-effective analysis (CEA) of Pap smear uptake by each recall method was then performed. The uptake of Pap smear by postal letter, registered letters, SMS and phone calls were 18.8%, 20.0%, 21.6% and 34.4%, respectively (p<0.05). The CER for the recall method was lowest by phone call compared to other interventions; RM 69.18 (SD RM 0.14) compared to RM 106.53 (SD RM 0.13), RM 134.02 (SD RM 0.15) and RM 136.38 (SD RM 0.11) for SMS, registered letter and letter, respectively. ICER showed that it is most cost saving if the usual method of recall by postal letter be changed to recall by phone call. The possibility of letter as a recall for repeat Pap smear to reach the women is higher compared to sending SMS or making phone call. However, getting women to do repeat Pap smear is better with phone call which allows direct communication. Despite the high cost of the phone call as a recall method for repeat Pap smear, it is the most cost-effective method compared to others.

Effect size and cost-effectiveness estimates of breast and cervical cancer screening reminders by population size through complete enumeration of Japanese local municipalities.

BACKGROUND: Client reminders are known to increase cancer screening attendance rates. However, there are significant costs associated with them, and their effect by population size is unknown. METHODS: In 2007 and 2008, the Japanese Government surveyed breast and cervical cancer screening in every municipality in Japan. From the results, we selected all 1,464 municipalities that carried out both screening types. We examined whether changes in screening attendance rates between 2007 and 2008 were associated with client reminders, number of public health nurses per 100,000 population, financial strength index, and 2007 attendance rates for different population sizes. We then calculated cost-effectiveness estimates of client reminders by population size and screening type. RESULTS: Client reminders were associated with increased attendance rates in populations <100,000. For populations of 50,000-100,000, there was a 2.76% increase in breast cancer screening (95% CI: 0.41, 5.11), and a 2.25% increase in cervical cancer screening (95% CI: 0.89, 3.61). The incremental cost per additional attendance was higher in populations <50,000 than in populations of 50,000-100,000 (breast, $100 versus $54; cervical, $149 versus $67 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Client reminders for breast and cervical cancer screening increased attendance rates in smaller municipalities in Japan.

Effect of provider and patient reminders, deployment of nurse practitioners, and financial incentives on cervical and breast cancer screening rates.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of the Provider and Patient Reminders in Ontario: Multi-Strategy Prevention Tools (P-PROMPT) reminder and recall system and pay-for-performance incentives on the delivery rates of cervical and breast cancer screening in primary care practices in Ontario, with or without deployment of nurse practitioners (NPs). DESIGN: Before-and-after comparisons of the time-appropriate delivery rates of cervical and breast cancer screening using the automated and NP-augmented strategies of the P-PROMPT reminder and recall system. SETTING: Southwestern Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 232 physicians from 24 primary care network or family health network groups across 110 different sites eligible for pay-for-performance incentives. INTERVENTIONS: The P-PROMPT project combined pay-for-performance incentives with provider and patient reminders and deployment of NPs to enhance the delivery of preventive care services. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The mean delivery rates at the practice level of time-appropriate mammograms and Papanicolaou tests completed within the previous 30 months. RESULTS: Before-and-after comparisons of time-appropriate delivery rates (< 30 months) of cancer screening showed the rates of Pap tests and mammograms for eligible women significantly increased over a 1-year period by 6.3% (P < .001) and 5.3% (P < .001), respectively. The NP-augmented strategy achieved comparable rate increases to the automated strategy alone in the delivery rates of both services. CONCLUSION: The use of provider and patient reminders and pay-for-performance incentives resulted in increases in the uptake of Pap tests and mammograms among eligible primary care patients over a 1-year period in family practices in Ontario.

Cost-effectiveness of an advance notification letter to increase colorectal cancer screening.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a patient-direct mailed advance notification letter on participants of a National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) in Australia, which was launched in August 2006 and offers free fecal occult blood testing to all Australians turning 50, 55, or 65 years of age in any given year. METHODS: This study followed a hypothetical cohort of 50-year-old, 55-year-old, and 65-year-old patients undergoing fecal occult blood test (FOBT) screening through a decision analytic Markov model. The intervention compared two strategies: (i) advance letter, NBCSP, and FOBT compared with (ii) NBCSP and FOBT. The main outcome measures were life-years gained (LYG), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: An advance notification screening letter would yield an additional 54 per 100,000 colorectal cancer deaths avoided compared with no letter. The estimated cost-effectiveness was $3,976 per LYG and $6,976 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: An advance notification letter in the NBCSP may have a significant impact on LYG and cancer deaths avoided. It is cost-effective and offers a feasible strategy that could be rolled out across other screening program at an acceptable cost.

An automated intervention with stepped increases in support to increase uptake of colorectal cancer screening: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Screening decreases colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality, yet almost half of age-eligible patients are not screened at recommended intervals. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether interventions using electronic health records (EHRs), automated mailings, and stepped increases in support improve CRC screening adherence over 2 years. DESIGN: 4-group, parallel-design, randomized, controlled comparative effectiveness trial with concealed allocation and blinded outcome assessments. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00697047) SETTING: 21 primary care medical centers. PATIENTS: 4675 adults aged 50 to 73 years not current for CRC screening. INTERVENTION: Usual care, EHR-linked mailings ("automated"), automated plus telephone assistance ("assisted"), or automated and assisted plus nurse navigation to testing completion or refusal ("navigated"). Interventions were repeated in year 2. MEASUREMENTS: The proportion of participants current for screening in both years, defined as colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy (year 1) or fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) in year 1 and FOBT, colonoscopy, or sigmoidoscopy (year 2). RESULTS: Compared with those in the usual care group, participants in the intervention groups were more likely to be current for CRC screening for both years with significant increases by intensity (usual care, 26.3% [95% CI, 23.4% to 29.2%]; automated, 50.8% [CI, 47.3% to 54.4%]; assisted, 57.5% [CI, 54.5% to 60.6%]; and navigated, 64.7% [CI, 62.5% to 67.0%]; P < 0.001 for all pair-wise comparisons). Increases in screening were primarily due to increased uptake of FOBT being completed in both years (usual care, 3.9% [CI, 2.8% to 5.1%]; automated, 27.5% [CI, 24.9% to 30.0%]; assisted, 30.5% [CI, 27.9% to 33.2%]; and navigated, 35.8% [CI, 33.1% to 38.6%]). LIMITATION: Participants were required to provide verbal consent and were more likely to be white and to participate in other types of cancer screening, limiting generalizability. CONCLUSION: Compared with usual care, a centralized, EHR-linked, mailed CRC screening program led to twice as many persons being current for screening over 2 years. Assisted and navigated interventions led to smaller but significant stepped increases compared with the automated intervention only. The rapid growth of EHRs provides opportunities for spreading this model broadly.