Upload
htai-bilbao-2012
View
636
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Report: Interventions to increase participation to organised cancer screening programs Ministry of Health Grant for Applied Research Giorgi Rossi P, Camilloni L, Ferroni E, Jimenez B, Furnari G, Guasticchi G, Borgia P. Laziosanità – Agenzia di Sanità Pubblica della Regione Lazio
Citation preview
Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Report: Interventions to increase participation to organised cancer
screening programs
Ministry of Health Grant for Applied Research
Giorgi Rossi P, Camilloni L, Ferroni E, Jimenez B, Furnari G, Guasticchi G, Borgia P.
Laziosanità – Agenzia di Sanità Pubblica
della Regione Lazio
HTAi 2012- Bilbao
Background
• The most important barrier reducing the effectiveness of oncological screening program is low participation of the target population.
• High participation rates are necessary to obtain a significant impact on population health.
• Compliance to invitation should be achieved by encouraging “informed” participation by individuals who are aware of the benefits, limitations and disadvantages of the screening program.
Objective
To synthesize the scientific evidence produced by International research on the efficacy of interventions to increase participation in screening programs.
Methods: the HTA process
• Identification of a multi-discipliner working group including all the principal investigators who conducted studies with public funding on screening participation in Italy
• Scope definition
• Stakeholder consultation
• Assessment and draft of the report
• Stakeholder consultation
• Final report
Methods: PICOS
We updated the systematic review by Jepson et al 2000.
Population: breast 49-69; cervix 25-64;
colorectal 50-74
Intervention: any type of intervention or strategy aimed at increasing participation
Comparison: standard invitation letter (with or without recall)
Outcome: participation to screening program;
Study: RCT, cRCT, controlled non-randomised, before/after studies.
Methods: assessment domains
1.Efficacy
2.Cost-effectiveness
3.Organizational impact
4.Social (inequalities), ethic (informed participation) and legal (privacy) issues
Study selection Flow chart
Potentially relevant citations (titles) identified and screened (n=5879)
Potentially relevant abstracts identified and
screened (n=958)
Retrieve full text for critical appraisal (n=145)
QT Studies full field inclusion criteria (n=52)
Excluded irrelevant citations
(n=4821)
Excluded QT irrelevant abstracts but useful for
QL Review (n=813)
Excluded irrelevant QT studies but useful for QL Review (n=93)
Studies from Jepson Review (n=70) Final set (n=122)
Classification of the interventions, according to the target
•To the target population: •the individual: invitations, reminders, etc.•the population: health education, information campaigns by the mass-media.
•Screening tests: new tests or new procedures; self-administered tests; etc. •Health professionals: training; stimuli for physicians, audit and feedback, etc.•Health service organization: removing financial or economic barriers, involving more providers, fixed or open appointments, etc.
Interventions targeted to individuals
•There is strong evidence of a positive effect of mail recall
Interventions targeted to individuals
•And phone recall
Interventions targeted to individuals
•Heterogenous results for face to face recall
Interventions targeted to individuals
•Thre is consistent evidence of a modest positive effect of the GP’s sign on the invitation letter
Interventions targeted to individuals
•Informational matherial mailed with the letter has no effect on participation
Interventions targeted to the population
Few studies evaluated the effect of mass media campaigns and there are several methodological problems
Other studies evaluating multi-facetted interventions, including mass media campaigns, showed non consistent results
Interventions that make screening tests easier or more acceptable
•Diet restrictions have a negative effect on FOBT compliance
•Higher number of evacuations have a negative effect on Guaiac FOBT compliance
Interventions that make screening tests easier or more acceptable
Self-sampling for HPV increases participation in non-responders compared to recall letter
Study or Subgroup
Giorgi Rossi 2010Gok 2010
Total (95% CI)
Total eventsHeterogeneity: Chi² = 0.73, df = 1 (P = 0.39); I² = 0%Test for overall effect: Z = 4.59 (P < 0.00001)
Events
1217404
7525
Total
61626920
27536
Events
8646
132
Total
619277
896
Weight
48.5%51.5%
100.0%
M-H, Fixed, 95% CI
1.41 [1.10, 1.82]1.66 [1.27, 2.16]
1.54 [1.28, 1.85]
self-sampling direct mail standard recall Risk Ratio Risk RatioM-H, Fixed, 95% CI
0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10standard self sampling
Interevtions targeted to health service organization
Fixed appointment has higher participation than open invitation
Interevtions targeted to health service organization
Remainder addressed to the GP flagging not screened people have a a modest consistent positive effect
Direct mailing of the FOBT vs piking up at the clinc showed heterogenous mostly positve results
Direct mailing has better results than on demand mailing
Interevtions targeted to health service organization
Cost-effectiveness
Given the low cost per QALY of the three cancer screening, we might spend up to 40€ to gain an unscreened woman to Pap test, 130€ for mammography, 80€ an individual to FOBT and 800€ for sygmoidoscopy.
We found economic evaluations only for few interventions and results are often context dependent:•Recall letters are consistently cost effective •Results for reminders to GPs are more heterogeneous
Social issues
•Some interventions have effects on inequalities:
•Longer and more detailed letters increase differneces in access.
•GP involvement is effective in increasing participation specifically of more disadvantaged people.
•Phone recalls are more effective in women with low educational level.
Conclusions
Many interventions have been implemented to increase patrticipation to screening, but only few of them have been evaluated
Effectiveness of these interventions may be context dependent.
Some interventions showed consistent positive results in many context and can be implemented with few resources:
•Mail recall
•GP’s sign
•Fixed appointment
Thank you!
HTA report available at:
Epiprev.it