Research Article
No access
Published Online: 21 October 2004

A Cost-Effectiveness Comparison of Three Tailored Interventions to Increase Mammography Screening

Publication: Journal of Women's Health
Volume 13, Issue Number 8

Abstract

Background: Mammography is the primary method used for breast cancer screening. However, adherence to recommended screening practices is still below acceptable levels. This study examined the cost-effectiveness of three combinations of tailored telephone and mailed intervention strategies for increasing adherence to mammography.
Methods: There were 1044 participants who were randomly assigned to one of four groups. A logistic regression model with adherence as the dependent variable and group as the independent variable was used to test for significant differences, and a ratio of cost/improvement in mammogram adherence evaluated the cost-effectiveness.
Results: All three of the interventions (tailored telephone, tailored mail, and tailored telephone and mail) had significantly better adherence rates compared with the control group (usual care). However, when also considering costs, one emerged as the superior strategy. The cost-effectiveness ratios for the three interventions show that the tailored mail (letter) was the most cost-effective strategy, achieving 43.3% mammography adherence at a marginal cost of $0.39 per 1% increase in women screened. The tailored mail plus telephone achieved greater adherence (49.4%), but at a higher cost ($0.56 per 1% increase in women screened).
Conclusions: A tailored mail reminder is an effective and economical intervention to increase mammography adherence. Future research should confirm this finding and address its applicability to practice in other settings.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

cover image Journal of Women's Health
Journal of Women's Health
Volume 13Issue Number 8October 2004
Pages: 909 - 918
PubMed: 15671706

History

Published online: 21 October 2004
Published in print: October 2004

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Topics

Authors

Affiliations

Robert M. Saywell, Jr.
Department of Family Medicine and Bowen Research Center, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Victoria L. Champion
Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Celette Sugg Skinner
Duke University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Usha Menon
University of Illinois-Chicago College of Nursing, Chicago, Illinois.
Joanne Daggy
Department of Medicine, Division of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Export citation

Select the format you want to export the citations of this publication.

View Options

Get Access

Access content

To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.

Society Access

If you are a member of a society that has access to this content please log in via your society website and then return to this publication.

Restore your content access

Enter your email address to restore your content access:

Note: This functionality works only for purchases done as a guest. If you already have an account, log in to access the content to which you are entitled.

View options

PDF/EPUB

View PDF/ePub

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share on social media

Back to Top