Cluster randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two primary care interventions aimed at improving attendance for breast screening

Objectives To examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two interventions based in primary care aimed at increasing uptake of breast screening. Setting 24 General practices with low uptake in the second round of screening (below 60%) in north west London and the West Midlands, UK. Participants were all women registered with these practices and eligible for screening in the third round. Methods Pragmatic factorial cluster randomised controlled trial, with practices randomised to a systematic intervention (general practitioner letter), an opportunistic intervention (flag in women's notes prompting discussion by health professionals), neither intervention, or both. Outcome measures were attendance for screening 6 months after the practices had been screened and cost-effectiveness of the interventions. Results 6133 Women were included: 1721 control; 1818 letter; 1232 flag; 1362 both interventions. Attendance data were obtained for 5732 (93%) women. The two interventions independently increased breast screening uptake in a logistic regression model adjusted for clustering, with the flag (odds ratio (OR) 1.43, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.14 to 1.79; p=0.0019) marginally more effective than the letter (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.64; p=0.015). Health service costs per additional attendance were £26 (letter) and £41 (flag). Conclusions Although both interventions increased attendance for breast screening, the letter was the more cost-effective. Any decision to implement both interventions rather than just the letter will depend on whether the additional (£41) costs are judged worthwhile in terms of the gains in breast screening uptake.

[1]  J. Kleijnen,et al.  The determinants of screening uptake and interventions for increasing uptake: a systematic review. , 2000, Health technology assessment.

[2]  J Austoker,et al.  Improving attendance for breast screening among recent non-attenders: a randomised controlled trial of two interventions in primary care , 2001, Journal of medical screening.

[3]  S. Woolf,et al.  Preserving scientific debate and patient choice: lessons from the Consensus Panel on Mammography Screening. National Institutes of Health. , 1997, JAMA.

[4]  P. R. Leonard,et al.  Mammogram utilization among farm women. , 1996, The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association.

[5]  R. Blanks,et al.  Effect of NHS breast screening programme on mortality from breast cancer in England and Wales, 1990-8: comparison of observed with predicted mortality , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[6]  S. Casswell,et al.  What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials , 1999 .

[7]  J. Pirkis,et al.  Recruitment of women by GPs for pap tests: a meta-analysis. , 1998, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[8]  S. Fox,et al.  The impact of physician compliance on screening mammography for older women. , 1991, Archives of internal medicine.

[9]  J Cornfield,et al.  Randomization by group: a formal analysis. , 1978, American journal of epidemiology.

[10]  William DuMouchel,et al.  A meta-analysis of 16 randomized controlled trials to evaluate computer-based clinical reminder systems for preventive care in the ambulatory setting. , 1996, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[11]  A S St Leger,et al.  Interventions to increase breast screening uptake: do they make any difference? , 1999, Journal of medical screening.

[12]  M. Coleman,et al.  How many deaths have been avoided through improvements in cancer survival? , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[13]  Jerome Cornfield,et al.  SYMPOSIUM ON CHD PREVENTION TRIALS: DESIGN ISSUES IN TESTING LIFE STYLE INTERVENTIONRANDOMIZATION BY GROUP: A FORMAL ANALYSIS , 1978 .

[14]  Peter C Gøtzsche,et al.  Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable? , 2000, The Lancet.

[15]  S. Hollis,et al.  What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials , 1999, BMJ.

[16]  C. Griffiths,et al.  Can postal prompts from general practitioners improve the uptake of breast screening? A randomised controlled trial in one east London general practice , 1998, Journal of medical screening.