The impact of reminder letters on attendance for breast cancer screening

1999 ◽  
Vol 168 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Hayes ◽  
B. O’Herlihy ◽  
M. Hynes ◽  
Z. Johnson
The Breast ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
pp. S44-S45
Author(s):  
G. Montagna ◽  
A.R. Schneeberger ◽  
L. Rossi ◽  
H. Reina ◽  
F. Schwab ◽  
...  

2002 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 168-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.H.C. Drossaert ◽  
H. Boer ◽  
E.R. Seydel

OBJECTIVES: (a) To monitor experiences of women during three successive rounds of breast screening; (b) to examine the impact of previous experiences (obtained either immediately after the latest mammogram or shortly before the subsequent one) on reattendance; and (c) to examine which factors are associated with the experience of pain and distress during screening. SETTING: The Dutch Breast Cancer Screening Programme METHODS: 2657 women completed a baseline measurement (response rate 67%) about 8 weeks after they had been invited for an initial mammogram (T1). Actual participation data of these women in the second and third rounds of screening were collected. Follow up questionnaires were sent to subgroups of the sample at different times: shortly before the second screening (T2; response rate 86%), shortly after the second screening (T3; response rate 85%), shortly before the third screening (T; response rate 80%), and shortly after the third screening (T5; response rate 78%). RESULTS: Most women were satisfied with the first screening round and remained positive about subsequent screens. Although pain and anxiety were not uncommon, only a few (10%–15%) experienced moderate or severe levels of distress or pain. Experiences were relatively stable: women who experienced pain in the first screen were more likely to experience pain in subsequent screens (r values from 0.39 to 0.50). Fear of breast cancer was associated with increased distress related to mammography and, to a lesser extent, with increased pain during the mammography. Evidence was found for a relief effect: women were more positive about their previous screen when asked shortly after this screen, than when asked just before the subsequent one. Previous experiences (obtained either proximally or distally) were only slightly predictive for future attendance. CONCLUSION: Experiences during mammography are fairly stable. Negative experiences were generally not a reason to drop out of the programme.


2016 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. e31
Author(s):  
Soudabeh Fazeli Dehkordy ◽  
Kelli S. Hall ◽  
Allison L. Roach ◽  
Edward D. Rothman ◽  
Vanessa K. Dalton ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 538-543
Author(s):  
Emma Ross ◽  
Aideen Maguire ◽  
Michael Donnelly ◽  
Adrian Mairs ◽  
Clare Hall ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Research from the USA indicates disparities in breast cancer screening uptake for women with poor mental health. However, no attempt has been made to examine the contribution of poor mental health to socio-demographic variations in breast screening uptake. The current study aims to examine the impact of self-reported chronic poor mental health on attendance at breast screening in the UK, and to what extent this explains socio-demographic inequalities in screening uptake. Methods Breast screening records were linked to 2011 Census records within the Northern Ireland Longitudinal Study. This identified a cohort of 57 328 women who were followed through one 3-year screening cycle of the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme. Information on mental health status, in addition to other individual and household-level attributes, was derived from the 2011 Census. Logistic regression was employed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of attendance at screening. Results 10.7% of women in the cohort reported poor mental health, and in fully adjusted analyses, these individuals were 23% less likely to attend breast screening (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.73–0.82). Although poor mental health was a strong predictor of screening uptake, it did not explain the observed inequalities in uptake by socio-economic status, marital status, or area of residence. Conclusions This study provides novel evidence of inequalities in breast screening uptake for women with chronic poor mental health in the UK. Targeted interventions are necessary to ensure equitable screening access and to enhance overall mortality benefit.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (27_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5-5
Author(s):  
Amy T. Wang ◽  
Jiaquan Fan ◽  
Holly K. Van Houten ◽  
Nilay D. Shah

5 Background: The 11/2009 USPSTF breast cancer screening update recommended against routine screening mammography for women age 40-49, created confusion and prompted organizations to release opposing statements. We aimed to determine if the USPSTF update for breast cancer screening impacted screening mammography utilization in women age 40-49. Methods: We conducted a time-series analysis utilizing administrative claims data from over 100 health plans. Women ages 40-64 with at least one month of enrollment from 01/2006-12/2010 were included. Medicare claims are not included and thus women ≥65 were excluded. The start date of 01/2006 was chosen to account for possible effects of the recent recession. We developed claims-based algorithms to identify the number of monthly screening mammograms. Time series models were fit using SAS PROC AUTOREG; strong seasonal fluctuations were adjusted by including an autoregressive error of order 12. Results: Over 7.9 million women were included. Prior to the intervention, the baseline monthly mammography rate was 40.9/1,000 women for the 40-49 group and 47.4/1,000 women for the 50-64 group. Based on projections from pre-intervention trends, the update was associated with a 5.72% (1.27,10.18) and 4.97% (1.11,8.84) decrease in mammography rate at 3 and 10 months post-intervention, respectively in the 40-49 group. The intervention had no effect on mammography rates in the 50-64 group. This translates to 53,969 fewer mammograms performed in the year following the update for women ages 40-49 in this dataset. Conclusions: We present the first estimates of the impact of the USPSTF breast cancer screening update using a large nationally representative database. The update was associated with a small but significant decrease in mammography rates for women ages 40-49, while no change was seen for women ages 50-64, which is consistent with the context of the guideline change. A modest effect is also in line with public backlash and the release of numerous conflicting guidelines. These findings underscore the need for further research on benefits and risks of screening mammography as it is difficult to act on numerous sources of contradictory information.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabian Tollens ◽  
Pascal A. T. Baltzer ◽  
Matthias Dietzel ◽  
Moritz L. Schnitzer ◽  
Wolfgang G. Kunz ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MR-mammography (MRM) vs. x-ray based mammography (XM) in two-yearly screening women of intermediate risk for breast cancer in the light of recent literature.MethodsDecision analysis and Markov modelling were used to compare cumulative costs (in US-$) and outcomes (in QALYs) of MRM vs. XM over the model runtime of 20 years. The perspective of the U.S. healthcare system was selected. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated and related to a willingness to pay-threshold of $ 100,000 per QALY in order to evaluate the cost-effectiveness. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the impact of variations of the input parameters. In particular, variations of the rate of false positive findings beyond the first screening round and their impact on cost-effectiveness were assessed.ResultsBreast cancer screening with MRM resulted in increased costs and superior effectiveness. Cumulative average costs of $ 6,081 per woman and cumulative effects of 15.12 QALYs were determined for MRM, whereas screening with XM resulted in costs of $ 5,810 and 15.10 QALYs, resulting in an ICER of $ 13,493 per QALY gained. When the specificity of MRM in the second and subsequent screening rounds was varied from 92% to 99%, the ICER resulted in a range from $ 38,849 to $ 5,062 per QALY.ConclusionsBased on most recent data on the diagnostic performance beyond the first screening round, MRM may remain the economically preferable alternative in screening women of intermediate risk for breast cancer due to their dense breast tissue.


Author(s):  
Akiko Matsumoto ◽  
Hirokazu Takahashi ◽  
Hiroko Tsunoda ◽  
Akihiko Suzuki ◽  
Takayoshi Uematsu ◽  
...  

Cancer ◽  
1986 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 581-585 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ned D. Rodes ◽  
Marvin J. Lopez ◽  
Dinah K. Pearson ◽  
Charles W. Blackwell ◽  
Harold D. Lankford

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document