Cargando…

Evaluation of the Call for a Kit intervention to increase bowel cancer screening uptake in Lancashire, England

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ‘Call for a Kit’ health promotion intervention that was initiated in Lancashire, England to improve bowel cancer screening uptake. METHODS: Within the intervention, screening non-responders are called and invited to attend a consultation with a health promotion team member...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stoffel, Sandro T, McGregor, Lesley, Hirst, Yasemin, Hanif, Sahida, Morris, Lorraine, von Wagner, Christian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9381688/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35410541
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/09691413221089184
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ‘Call for a Kit’ health promotion intervention that was initiated in Lancashire, England to improve bowel cancer screening uptake. METHODS: Within the intervention, screening non-responders are called and invited to attend a consultation with a health promotion team member at their primary care practice. In this audit, we analysed the proportion of those contacted who attended the in-person clinic versus those who received a phone consultation, the number returning a test kit from in-person versus phone consultations, and the extent to which test kit return was moderated by sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: In 2019, 68 practices participated in the intervention which led to 10,772 individuals being contacted; 2464 accepted the invitation to an in-person consultation, of whom 1943 attended. A further 1065 agreed to and attended a consultation over the phone. The 3008 consultations resulted in 2890 test kits being ordered, of which 1608 (55.6%) were returned. The intervention therefore yielded a 14.9% response rate in the total cohort; 71.5% of test kits came from individuals attending the in-person consultation. Women and those registered with a practice in socioeconomically deprived areas were less likely to return the test kit. Individuals with a black, mixed or a non-Indian/Pakistani Asian ethnic background were significantly more likely to accept the offer of an in-person consultation and return the test kit. CONCLUSION: Our analysis demonstrated the strong likelihood of people returning a test kit after an in-person appointment but also the usefulness of using phone consultations as a safety net for people unable or unwilling to attend in-person clinics.