Advertisement

Reminder letter, tailored stepped-care, and self-choice comparison for repeat mammography

      Abstract

      Background

      The main benefits of mammography come from regular on-schedule screening. However, few studies have examined interventions to achieve repeat screening.

      Setting and participants

      Participants were women aged 50 to 74, recruited through one setting in Rhode Island and another in North Carolina. Participants had a mammogram already scheduled at recruitment, and had to keep that appointment in order to be eligible for the repeat mammography intervention. A total of 1614 women were in the intervention sample.

      Design

      A four-group randomized design was used: Group 1, a simple reminder letter; Group 2, a 2-month, tailored, stepped intervention delivered 2 months after the completed mammogram; Group 3, a 10-month, tailored, stepped intervention delivered 2 months before the repeat mammogram was due; and Group 4, self-choice of one of the above three strategies.

      Intervention

      The intervention took place between June 1996 and May 1997. The reminder letter and two levels of the stepped intervention were delivered by mail. The third level of the stepped strategy was a counselor telephone call. Groups 2 and 3 were identical, except for timing.

      Outcome measure

      Obtaining the next due mammogram within 15 months, based on clinic records.

      Results

      There were no statistically significant differences among the four groups, both in the total sample and at the two sites separately.

      Conclusions

      On average, a simple reminder may be as effective as more complex strategies for women with a prior on-schedule exam. However, attention is still needed to identify women at risk of lapsing from screening. Some women may require more-intensive interventions.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Blackman D.K.
        • Bennett E.M.
        • Miller D.S.
        Trends in self-reported use of mammograms (1989–1997) and Papanicolau tests (1991–1997)—Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.
        MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1999; 48: 1-22
      1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, prevalence estimates. Available at: apps.nccd.cdc.gov/brfss/Trends/TrendsData.asp/index/asp. Accessed June 5, 2002

        • Breen N.
        • Wagener D.K.
        • Brown M.L.
        • Davis W.W.
        • Ballard-Barbash R.
        Progress in cancer screening over a decade.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001; 93: 1704-1713
      2. Clark MA, Rakowski W, Bonacore LB. Status of the prevalence of repeat mammography and issues of assessment. Ann Behav Med. In press

        • Mayer J.A.
        • Lewis E.C.
        • Slymen D.J.
        • et al.
        Patient reminder letters to promote annual mammograms.
        Prev Med. 2000; 31: 315-322
        • Clark M.A.
        • Rakowski W.
        • Ehrich B.
        • et al.
        The effect of a stage-matched and tailored intervention on repeat mammography.
        Am J Prev Med. 2002; 22: 1-7
        • Lipkus I.M.
        • Rimer B.K.
        • Halabi S.
        • Strigo T.S.
        Can tailored interventions increase mammography use among HMO women?.
        Am J Prev Med. 2000; 18: 1-10
        • Rimer B.K.
        • Halabi S.
        • Skinner C.S.
        • et al.
        Effects of a mammography decision-making intervention at 12 and 24 months.
        Am J Prev Med. 2002; 22: 247-257
        • Rakowski W.
        • Ehrich B.
        • Goldstein M.G.
        • et al.
        Increasing mammography among women aged 40–74 by use of a stage-matched, tailored intervention.
        Prev Med. 1998; 27: 748-756
        • King E.S.
        • Rimer B.K.
        • Seay J.
        • Balshem A.
        • Engstrom P.F.
        Promoting mammography use through progressive interventions.
        Am J Public Health. 1994; 84: 104-106
        • McBride C.M.
        • Rimer B.K.
        Using the telephone to improve health behavior and health services delivery.
        Patient Educ Counseling. 1999; 37: 3-18
        • Rakowski W.
        • Dube C.
        • Marcus B.H.
        • Prochaska J.O.
        • Velicer W.F.
        • Abrams D.
        Assessing elements of women's decisions about mammography.
        Health Psychol. 1992; 11: 111-118
        • Rakowski W.
        • Ehrich B.
        • Dube C.
        • et al.
        Screening mammography and constructs from the transtheoretical model.
        Ann Behav Med. 1996; 18: 91-100
        • Taplin S.H.
        • Barlow W.E.
        • Ludman E.
        • et al.
        Testing reminder and motivational telephone calls to increase screening mammography.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000; 92: 233-242
        • Legler J.
        • Meissner H.I.
        • Coyne C.
        • Breen N.
        • Chollette V.
        • Rimer B.K.
        The effectiveness of interventions to promote mammography among women with historically lower rates of screening.
        Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002; 11: 59-71
        • Wagner T.H.
        The effectiveness of mailed patient reminders on mammography screening.
        Am J Prev Med. 1998; 14: 64-70
        • Yabroff K.R.
        • Mandelblatt J.S.
        Interventions targeted toward patients to increase mammography use.
        Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1999; 8: 749-757
      3. Bonfill X, Marzo M, Pladevall M, Marti J, Emparanza JI. Strategies for increasing women's participation in community breast cancer screening (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2001. Oxford, Update Software

        • Curry S.J.
        • Emmons K.M.
        Theoretical models for predicting and improving compliance with breast cancer screening.
        Ann Behav Med. 1994; 16: 300-316
      4. Glanz K. Lewis F.M. Rimer B.K. Health behavior and health education: theory, research, and practice. 2nd ed. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco CA1997
        • Fishbein M.
        The role of theory in HIV prevention.
        AIDS Care. 2000; 12: 273-278
        • Rakowski W.
        The potential variances of tailoring in health behavior interventions.
        Ann Behav Med. 1999; 21: 284-289
        • Rakowski W.
        • Clark M.A.
        The potential for health care organizations to promote maintenance and change in health behaviors among the elderly.
        in: Schaie K.W. Leventhal H. Willis S. Effective health behavior in older adults. Springer, New York2002: 249-278