Cargando…
Interventions for increasing uptake in screening programmes
INTRODUCTION: Opportunities for the early detection of disease are not sufficiently being taken advantage of. Specific interventions could increase the uptake of prevention programmes. A comprehensive analysis of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these interventions with reference to Germany i...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
German Medical Science GMS Publishing House
2006
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3011350/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21289967 |
_version_ | 1782194920769978368 |
---|---|
author | Walter, Ulla Krauth, Christian Wienold, Matthias Dreier, Maren Bantel, Susanne Droste, Sigrid |
author_facet | Walter, Ulla Krauth, Christian Wienold, Matthias Dreier, Maren Bantel, Susanne Droste, Sigrid |
author_sort | Walter, Ulla |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Opportunities for the early detection of disease are not sufficiently being taken advantage of. Specific interventions could increase the uptake of prevention programmes. A comprehensive analysis of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these interventions with reference to Germany is still needed. OBJECTIVES: This report aimed to describe and assess interventions to increase uptake in primary and secondary prevention and to explore the assessment of their cost-effectiveness. METHODS: 29 scientific databases were systematically searched in a wide strategy. Additional references were located from bibliographies. All published systematic reviews and primary studies were assessed for inclusion without language restrictions. Teams of two reviewers identified the literature, extracted data and assessed the quality of the publications independently. RESULTS: Four HTA reports and 22 systematic reviews were identified for the medical evaluation covering a variety of interventions. The economic evaluation was based on two HTA-reports, one meta-analysis and 15 studies. The evidence was consistent for the effectiveness of invitations and reminders aimed at users, and for prompts aimed at health care professionals. These interventions were the most commonly analysed. (Financial) Incentives for users and professionals were identified in a small number of studies. Limited evidence was available for cost-effectiveness showing incremental costs for follow-up reminders and invitations by telephone. Evidence for ethical, social and legal aspects pointed to needs in vulnerable populations. DISCUSSION: The material was heterogeneous regarding interventions used, study populations and settings. The majority of references originated from the United States and focused on secondary prevention. Approaching all target groups by invitations and reminders was recommended to increase uptake in prevention programmes in general. CONCLUSIONS: Further research should aim to focus on primary prevention. Future research should also focus on specific interventions aiming to include vulnerable target groups and individuals, who have not previously made use of opportunities for prevention. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-3011350 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2006 |
publisher | German Medical Science GMS Publishing House |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-30113502011-02-02 Interventions for increasing uptake in screening programmes Walter, Ulla Krauth, Christian Wienold, Matthias Dreier, Maren Bantel, Susanne Droste, Sigrid GMS Health Technol Assess Article INTRODUCTION: Opportunities for the early detection of disease are not sufficiently being taken advantage of. Specific interventions could increase the uptake of prevention programmes. A comprehensive analysis of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these interventions with reference to Germany is still needed. OBJECTIVES: This report aimed to describe and assess interventions to increase uptake in primary and secondary prevention and to explore the assessment of their cost-effectiveness. METHODS: 29 scientific databases were systematically searched in a wide strategy. Additional references were located from bibliographies. All published systematic reviews and primary studies were assessed for inclusion without language restrictions. Teams of two reviewers identified the literature, extracted data and assessed the quality of the publications independently. RESULTS: Four HTA reports and 22 systematic reviews were identified for the medical evaluation covering a variety of interventions. The economic evaluation was based on two HTA-reports, one meta-analysis and 15 studies. The evidence was consistent for the effectiveness of invitations and reminders aimed at users, and for prompts aimed at health care professionals. These interventions were the most commonly analysed. (Financial) Incentives for users and professionals were identified in a small number of studies. Limited evidence was available for cost-effectiveness showing incremental costs for follow-up reminders and invitations by telephone. Evidence for ethical, social and legal aspects pointed to needs in vulnerable populations. DISCUSSION: The material was heterogeneous regarding interventions used, study populations and settings. The majority of references originated from the United States and focused on secondary prevention. Approaching all target groups by invitations and reminders was recommended to increase uptake in prevention programmes in general. CONCLUSIONS: Further research should aim to focus on primary prevention. Future research should also focus on specific interventions aiming to include vulnerable target groups and individuals, who have not previously made use of opportunities for prevention. German Medical Science GMS Publishing House 2006-08-16 /pmc/articles/PMC3011350/ /pubmed/21289967 Text en Copyright © 2006 Walter et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/deed.en). You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the work, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Article Walter, Ulla Krauth, Christian Wienold, Matthias Dreier, Maren Bantel, Susanne Droste, Sigrid Interventions for increasing uptake in screening programmes |
title | Interventions for increasing uptake in screening programmes |
title_full | Interventions for increasing uptake in screening programmes |
title_fullStr | Interventions for increasing uptake in screening programmes |
title_full_unstemmed | Interventions for increasing uptake in screening programmes |
title_short | Interventions for increasing uptake in screening programmes |
title_sort | interventions for increasing uptake in screening programmes |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3011350/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21289967 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT walterulla interventionsforincreasinguptakeinscreeningprogrammes AT krauthchristian interventionsforincreasinguptakeinscreeningprogrammes AT wienoldmatthias interventionsforincreasinguptakeinscreeningprogrammes AT dreiermaren interventionsforincreasinguptakeinscreeningprogrammes AT bantelsusanne interventionsforincreasinguptakeinscreeningprogrammes AT drostesigrid interventionsforincreasinguptakeinscreeningprogrammes |