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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |