Cargando…

Methods to increase participation in organised screening programs: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: The European Community recommends the implementation of population-based screening programmes for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancers. This recommendation is supported by many observational studies showing that organised programmes effectively reduce mortality and control the inappr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Camilloni, Laura, Ferroni, Eliana, Cendales, Beatriz Jimenez, Pezzarossi, Annamaria, Furnari, Giacomo, Borgia, Piero, Guasticchi, Gabriella, Rossi, Paolo Giorgi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3686655/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23663511
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-464
_version_ 1782273808208494592
author Camilloni, Laura
Ferroni, Eliana
Cendales, Beatriz Jimenez
Pezzarossi, Annamaria
Furnari, Giacomo
Borgia, Piero
Guasticchi, Gabriella
Rossi, Paolo Giorgi
author_facet Camilloni, Laura
Ferroni, Eliana
Cendales, Beatriz Jimenez
Pezzarossi, Annamaria
Furnari, Giacomo
Borgia, Piero
Guasticchi, Gabriella
Rossi, Paolo Giorgi
author_sort Camilloni, Laura
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The European Community recommends the implementation of population-based screening programmes for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancers. This recommendation is supported by many observational studies showing that organised programmes effectively reduce mortality and control the inappropriate use of screening tests. We conducted a systematic review of studies assessing the efficacy of interventions to increase participation in organised population-based screening programs. METHODS: We included all studies on interventions aimed at increasing screening participation published between 1/1999 and 7/2012. For those published before 1999, we considered the Jepson et al. (2000) review (Health Technol Assess 4:1-133, 2000). RESULTS: Including studies from the Jepson review, we found 69 with quantitative information on interventions in organised screening: 19 for cervical, 26 for breast, 20 colorectal cancers, and 4 for cervical and breast cancer together. Effective interventions were: postal (breast RR = 1,37 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI): 1.25-1.51; cervical RR = 1.71 95% CI: 1.60-1.83; colorectal RR = 1.33 95% CI: 1.17-1.51) and telephone reminders (with heterogeneous methods for implementation); GP’s signature on invitation letter (breast RR = 1.13 95% CI: 1.11-1.16; cervical RR = 1.20 95% CI: 1.10-1.30; colorectal RR = 1.15 95% CI: 1.07-1.24); scheduled appointment instead of open appointment (breast RR = 1.26 95% CI: 1.02-1.55; cervical RR = 1.49 95% CI: 1.27-1.75; colorectal RR = 1.79 95% CI: 1.65-1.93). Mailing a kit for self-sampling cervical specimens increased participation in non-responders (RR = 2.37 95% CI: 1.44-3.90). CONCLUSION: Although some interventions did prove to be effective, some specific variables may influence their effectiveness in and applicability to organised population-based screening programs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3686655
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36866552013-06-20 Methods to increase participation in organised screening programs: a systematic review Camilloni, Laura Ferroni, Eliana Cendales, Beatriz Jimenez Pezzarossi, Annamaria Furnari, Giacomo Borgia, Piero Guasticchi, Gabriella Rossi, Paolo Giorgi BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: The European Community recommends the implementation of population-based screening programmes for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancers. This recommendation is supported by many observational studies showing that organised programmes effectively reduce mortality and control the inappropriate use of screening tests. We conducted a systematic review of studies assessing the efficacy of interventions to increase participation in organised population-based screening programs. METHODS: We included all studies on interventions aimed at increasing screening participation published between 1/1999 and 7/2012. For those published before 1999, we considered the Jepson et al. (2000) review (Health Technol Assess 4:1-133, 2000). RESULTS: Including studies from the Jepson review, we found 69 with quantitative information on interventions in organised screening: 19 for cervical, 26 for breast, 20 colorectal cancers, and 4 for cervical and breast cancer together. Effective interventions were: postal (breast RR = 1,37 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI): 1.25-1.51; cervical RR = 1.71 95% CI: 1.60-1.83; colorectal RR = 1.33 95% CI: 1.17-1.51) and telephone reminders (with heterogeneous methods for implementation); GP’s signature on invitation letter (breast RR = 1.13 95% CI: 1.11-1.16; cervical RR = 1.20 95% CI: 1.10-1.30; colorectal RR = 1.15 95% CI: 1.07-1.24); scheduled appointment instead of open appointment (breast RR = 1.26 95% CI: 1.02-1.55; cervical RR = 1.49 95% CI: 1.27-1.75; colorectal RR = 1.79 95% CI: 1.65-1.93). Mailing a kit for self-sampling cervical specimens increased participation in non-responders (RR = 2.37 95% CI: 1.44-3.90). CONCLUSION: Although some interventions did prove to be effective, some specific variables may influence their effectiveness in and applicability to organised population-based screening programs. BioMed Central 2013-05-13 /pmc/articles/PMC3686655/ /pubmed/23663511 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-464 Text en Copyright © 2013 Camilloni 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
Camilloni, Laura
Ferroni, Eliana
Cendales, Beatriz Jimenez
Pezzarossi, Annamaria
Furnari, Giacomo
Borgia, Piero
Guasticchi, Gabriella
Rossi, Paolo Giorgi
Methods to increase participation in organised screening programs: a systematic review
title Methods to increase participation in organised screening programs: a systematic review
title_full Methods to increase participation in organised screening programs: a systematic review
title_fullStr Methods to increase participation in organised screening programs: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Methods to increase participation in organised screening programs: a systematic review
title_short Methods to increase participation in organised screening programs: a systematic review
title_sort methods to increase participation in organised screening programs: a systematic review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3686655/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23663511
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-464
work_keys_str_mv AT camillonilaura methodstoincreaseparticipationinorganisedscreeningprogramsasystematicreview
AT ferronieliana methodstoincreaseparticipationinorganisedscreeningprogramsasystematicreview
AT cendalesbeatrizjimenez methodstoincreaseparticipationinorganisedscreeningprogramsasystematicreview
AT pezzarossiannamaria methodstoincreaseparticipationinorganisedscreeningprogramsasystematicreview
AT furnarigiacomo methodstoincreaseparticipationinorganisedscreeningprogramsasystematicreview
AT borgiapiero methodstoincreaseparticipationinorganisedscreeningprogramsasystematicreview
AT guasticchigabriella methodstoincreaseparticipationinorganisedscreeningprogramsasystematicreview
AT rossipaologiorgi methodstoincreaseparticipationinorganisedscreeningprogramsasystematicreview