Cargando…

Reducing the socioeconomic gradient in uptake of the NHS bowel cancer screening Programme using a simplified supplementary information leaflet: a cluster-randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Uptake of colorectal cancer screening is low in the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP). Participation in screening is strongly associated with socioeconomic status. The aim of this study was to determine whether a supplementary leaflet providing the ‘gist’ of guaiac-base...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Smith, Samuel G., Wardle, Jane, Atkin, Wendy, Raine, Rosalind, McGregor, Lesley M., Vart, Gemma, Morris, Steve, Duffy, Stephen W., Moss, Susan, Hackshaw, Allan, Halloran, Stephen, Kralj-Hans, Ines, Howe, Rosemary, Snowball, Julia, Handley, Graham, Logan, Richard F., Rainbow, Sandra, Smith, Steve, Thomas, Mary, Counsell, Nicholas, von Wagner, Christian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5556676/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28806955
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3512-1
_version_ 1783257112382537728
author Smith, Samuel G.
Wardle, Jane
Atkin, Wendy
Raine, Rosalind
McGregor, Lesley M.
Vart, Gemma
Morris, Steve
Duffy, Stephen W.
Moss, Susan
Hackshaw, Allan
Halloran, Stephen
Kralj-Hans, Ines
Howe, Rosemary
Snowball, Julia
Handley, Graham
Logan, Richard F.
Rainbow, Sandra
Smith, Steve
Thomas, Mary
Counsell, Nicholas
von Wagner, Christian
author_facet Smith, Samuel G.
Wardle, Jane
Atkin, Wendy
Raine, Rosalind
McGregor, Lesley M.
Vart, Gemma
Morris, Steve
Duffy, Stephen W.
Moss, Susan
Hackshaw, Allan
Halloran, Stephen
Kralj-Hans, Ines
Howe, Rosemary
Snowball, Julia
Handley, Graham
Logan, Richard F.
Rainbow, Sandra
Smith, Steve
Thomas, Mary
Counsell, Nicholas
von Wagner, Christian
author_sort Smith, Samuel G.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Uptake of colorectal cancer screening is low in the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP). Participation in screening is strongly associated with socioeconomic status. The aim of this study was to determine whether a supplementary leaflet providing the ‘gist’ of guaiac-based Faecal Occult Blood test (gFOBt) screening for colorectal cancer could reduce the socioeconomic status (SES) gradient in uptake in the English NHS BCSP. METHODS: The trial was integrated within routine BCSP operations in November 2012. Using a cluster randomised controlled design all adults aged 59–74 years who were being routinely invited to complete the gFOBt were randomised based on day of invitation. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was used to create SES quintiles. The control group received the standard information booklet (‘SI’). The intervention group received the SI booklet and the Gist leaflet (‘SI + Gist’) which had been designed to help people with lower literacy engage with the invitation. Blinding of hubs was not possible and invited subjects were not made aware of a comparator condition. The primary outcome was the gradient in uptake across IMD quintiles. RESULTS: In November 2012, 163,525 individuals were allocated to either the ‘SI’ intervention (n = 79,104) or the ‘SI + Gist’ group (n = 84,421). Overall uptake was similar between the intervention and control groups (SI: 57.3% and SI + Gist: 57.6%; OR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.92–1.13, p = 0.77). Uptake was 42.0% (SI) vs. 43.0% (SI + Gist) in the most deprived quintile and 65.6% vs. 65.8% in the least deprived quintile (interaction p = 0.48). The SES gradient in uptake was similar between the study groups within age, gender, hub and screening round sub-groups. CONCLUSIONS: Providing supplementary simplified information in addition to the standard information booklet did not reduce the SES gradient in uptake in the NHS BCSP. The effectiveness of the Gist leaflet when used alone should be explored in future research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN74121020, registered: 17/20/2012. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3512-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5556676
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55566762017-08-16 Reducing the socioeconomic gradient in uptake of the NHS bowel cancer screening Programme using a simplified supplementary information leaflet: a cluster-randomised trial Smith, Samuel G. Wardle, Jane Atkin, Wendy Raine, Rosalind McGregor, Lesley M. Vart, Gemma Morris, Steve Duffy, Stephen W. Moss, Susan Hackshaw, Allan Halloran, Stephen Kralj-Hans, Ines Howe, Rosemary Snowball, Julia Handley, Graham Logan, Richard F. Rainbow, Sandra Smith, Steve Thomas, Mary Counsell, Nicholas von Wagner, Christian BMC Cancer Research Article BACKGROUND: Uptake of colorectal cancer screening is low in the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP). Participation in screening is strongly associated with socioeconomic status. The aim of this study was to determine whether a supplementary leaflet providing the ‘gist’ of guaiac-based Faecal Occult Blood test (gFOBt) screening for colorectal cancer could reduce the socioeconomic status (SES) gradient in uptake in the English NHS BCSP. METHODS: The trial was integrated within routine BCSP operations in November 2012. Using a cluster randomised controlled design all adults aged 59–74 years who were being routinely invited to complete the gFOBt were randomised based on day of invitation. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was used to create SES quintiles. The control group received the standard information booklet (‘SI’). The intervention group received the SI booklet and the Gist leaflet (‘SI + Gist’) which had been designed to help people with lower literacy engage with the invitation. Blinding of hubs was not possible and invited subjects were not made aware of a comparator condition. The primary outcome was the gradient in uptake across IMD quintiles. RESULTS: In November 2012, 163,525 individuals were allocated to either the ‘SI’ intervention (n = 79,104) or the ‘SI + Gist’ group (n = 84,421). Overall uptake was similar between the intervention and control groups (SI: 57.3% and SI + Gist: 57.6%; OR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.92–1.13, p = 0.77). Uptake was 42.0% (SI) vs. 43.0% (SI + Gist) in the most deprived quintile and 65.6% vs. 65.8% in the least deprived quintile (interaction p = 0.48). The SES gradient in uptake was similar between the study groups within age, gender, hub and screening round sub-groups. CONCLUSIONS: Providing supplementary simplified information in addition to the standard information booklet did not reduce the SES gradient in uptake in the NHS BCSP. The effectiveness of the Gist leaflet when used alone should be explored in future research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN74121020, registered: 17/20/2012. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3512-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-08-14 /pmc/articles/PMC5556676/ /pubmed/28806955 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3512-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Smith, Samuel G.
Wardle, Jane
Atkin, Wendy
Raine, Rosalind
McGregor, Lesley M.
Vart, Gemma
Morris, Steve
Duffy, Stephen W.
Moss, Susan
Hackshaw, Allan
Halloran, Stephen
Kralj-Hans, Ines
Howe, Rosemary
Snowball, Julia
Handley, Graham
Logan, Richard F.
Rainbow, Sandra
Smith, Steve
Thomas, Mary
Counsell, Nicholas
von Wagner, Christian
Reducing the socioeconomic gradient in uptake of the NHS bowel cancer screening Programme using a simplified supplementary information leaflet: a cluster-randomised trial
title Reducing the socioeconomic gradient in uptake of the NHS bowel cancer screening Programme using a simplified supplementary information leaflet: a cluster-randomised trial
title_full Reducing the socioeconomic gradient in uptake of the NHS bowel cancer screening Programme using a simplified supplementary information leaflet: a cluster-randomised trial
title_fullStr Reducing the socioeconomic gradient in uptake of the NHS bowel cancer screening Programme using a simplified supplementary information leaflet: a cluster-randomised trial
title_full_unstemmed Reducing the socioeconomic gradient in uptake of the NHS bowel cancer screening Programme using a simplified supplementary information leaflet: a cluster-randomised trial
title_short Reducing the socioeconomic gradient in uptake of the NHS bowel cancer screening Programme using a simplified supplementary information leaflet: a cluster-randomised trial
title_sort reducing the socioeconomic gradient in uptake of the nhs bowel cancer screening programme using a simplified supplementary information leaflet: a cluster-randomised trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5556676/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28806955
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3512-1
work_keys_str_mv AT smithsamuelg reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT wardlejane reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT atkinwendy reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT rainerosalind reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT mcgregorlesleym reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT vartgemma reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT morrissteve reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT duffystephenw reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT mosssusan reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT hackshawallan reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT halloranstephen reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT kraljhansines reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT howerosemary reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT snowballjulia reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT handleygraham reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT loganrichardf reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT rainbowsandra reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT smithsteve reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT thomasmary reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT counsellnicholas reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial
AT vonwagnerchristian reducingthesocioeconomicgradientinuptakeofthenhsbowelcancerscreeningprogrammeusingasimplifiedsupplementaryinformationleafletaclusterrandomisedtrial