Cargando…

Should young people be paid for getting tested? A national comparative study to evaluate patient financial incentives for chlamydia screening

BACKGROUND: Patient financial incentives ("incentives") have been widely used to promote chlamydia screening uptake amongst 15-24 year olds in England, but there is scarce evidence of their effectiveness. The objectives of the study were to describe incentives used to promote chlamydia scr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zenner, Dominik, Molinar, Darko, Nichols, Tom, Riha, Johanna, Macintosh, Mary, Nardone, Anthony
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3350390/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22471791
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-261
_version_ 1782232652778045440
author Zenner, Dominik
Molinar, Darko
Nichols, Tom
Riha, Johanna
Macintosh, Mary
Nardone, Anthony
author_facet Zenner, Dominik
Molinar, Darko
Nichols, Tom
Riha, Johanna
Macintosh, Mary
Nardone, Anthony
author_sort Zenner, Dominik
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Patient financial incentives ("incentives") have been widely used to promote chlamydia screening uptake amongst 15-24 year olds in England, but there is scarce evidence of their effectiveness. The objectives of the study were to describe incentives used to promote chlamydia screening in Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) in England and to evaluate their impact on coverage and positivity rate. METHODS: PCTs that had used incentives between 1/1/2007 and 30/6/2009 (exposed) were matched by socio-demographic profile and initial screening coverage with PCTs that had not (unexposed). For each PCT, percentage point change in chlamydia screening coverage and positivity for the period before and during the incentive was calculated. Differences in average change of coverage and positivity rate between exposed and unexposed PCTs were compared using linear regression to adjust for matching and potential confounders. RESULTS: Incentives had a significant effect in increasing average coverage in exposed PCTs (0.43%, CI 0.04%-0.82%). The effect for voucher schemes (2.35%) was larger than for prize draws (0.16%). The difference was greater in females (0.73%) than males (0.14%). The effect on positivity rates was not significant (0.07%, CI -1.53% to 1.67%). CONCLUSIONS: Vouchers, but not prize draws, led to a small absolute but large relative increase in chlamydia screening coverage. Incentives increased coverage more in females than males but had no impact on reported positivity rates. These findings support recommendations not to use prize draws to promote chlamydia screening and contribute to the evidence base of the operational effectiveness of using patient incentives in encouraging public health action.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3350390
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33503902012-05-12 Should young people be paid for getting tested? A national comparative study to evaluate patient financial incentives for chlamydia screening Zenner, Dominik Molinar, Darko Nichols, Tom Riha, Johanna Macintosh, Mary Nardone, Anthony BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: Patient financial incentives ("incentives") have been widely used to promote chlamydia screening uptake amongst 15-24 year olds in England, but there is scarce evidence of their effectiveness. The objectives of the study were to describe incentives used to promote chlamydia screening in Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) in England and to evaluate their impact on coverage and positivity rate. METHODS: PCTs that had used incentives between 1/1/2007 and 30/6/2009 (exposed) were matched by socio-demographic profile and initial screening coverage with PCTs that had not (unexposed). For each PCT, percentage point change in chlamydia screening coverage and positivity for the period before and during the incentive was calculated. Differences in average change of coverage and positivity rate between exposed and unexposed PCTs were compared using linear regression to adjust for matching and potential confounders. RESULTS: Incentives had a significant effect in increasing average coverage in exposed PCTs (0.43%, CI 0.04%-0.82%). The effect for voucher schemes (2.35%) was larger than for prize draws (0.16%). The difference was greater in females (0.73%) than males (0.14%). The effect on positivity rates was not significant (0.07%, CI -1.53% to 1.67%). CONCLUSIONS: Vouchers, but not prize draws, led to a small absolute but large relative increase in chlamydia screening coverage. Incentives increased coverage more in females than males but had no impact on reported positivity rates. These findings support recommendations not to use prize draws to promote chlamydia screening and contribute to the evidence base of the operational effectiveness of using patient incentives in encouraging public health action. BioMed Central 2012-04-02 /pmc/articles/PMC3350390/ /pubmed/22471791 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-261 Text en Copyright ©2012 Zenner et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Zenner, Dominik
Molinar, Darko
Nichols, Tom
Riha, Johanna
Macintosh, Mary
Nardone, Anthony
Should young people be paid for getting tested? A national comparative study to evaluate patient financial incentives for chlamydia screening
title Should young people be paid for getting tested? A national comparative study to evaluate patient financial incentives for chlamydia screening
title_full Should young people be paid for getting tested? A national comparative study to evaluate patient financial incentives for chlamydia screening
title_fullStr Should young people be paid for getting tested? A national comparative study to evaluate patient financial incentives for chlamydia screening
title_full_unstemmed Should young people be paid for getting tested? A national comparative study to evaluate patient financial incentives for chlamydia screening
title_short Should young people be paid for getting tested? A national comparative study to evaluate patient financial incentives for chlamydia screening
title_sort should young people be paid for getting tested? a national comparative study to evaluate patient financial incentives for chlamydia screening
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3350390/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22471791
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-261
work_keys_str_mv AT zennerdominik shouldyoungpeoplebepaidforgettingtestedanationalcomparativestudytoevaluatepatientfinancialincentivesforchlamydiascreening
AT molinardarko shouldyoungpeoplebepaidforgettingtestedanationalcomparativestudytoevaluatepatientfinancialincentivesforchlamydiascreening
AT nicholstom shouldyoungpeoplebepaidforgettingtestedanationalcomparativestudytoevaluatepatientfinancialincentivesforchlamydiascreening
AT rihajohanna shouldyoungpeoplebepaidforgettingtestedanationalcomparativestudytoevaluatepatientfinancialincentivesforchlamydiascreening
AT macintoshmary shouldyoungpeoplebepaidforgettingtestedanationalcomparativestudytoevaluatepatientfinancialincentivesforchlamydiascreening
AT nardoneanthony shouldyoungpeoplebepaidforgettingtestedanationalcomparativestudytoevaluatepatientfinancialincentivesforchlamydiascreening