MEMORANDUM FOR: Science Writers and Editors on the Journal Press List

Phone Call Reminder Increases Likelihood of Mammography

January 27, 2000 (EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE 4 P.M. EST February 1)

Katherine Arnold, Deputy News Editor, Dan Eckstein, (301) 986-1891, ext. 112

A simple reminder phone call was as effective in getting women to schedule a mammogram as a longer motivational phone call, and either call was about twice as effective as a postcard.

These results, based on interactions with 1765 women, are presented by Stephen Taplin, M.D., M.P.H., of the Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, and colleagues, in the February 2 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

The study drew from a large population of women enrolled in the Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, a nonprofit health maintenance organization. An initial group of 3743 women aged 50-79 years agreed to participate in the study. After completing a questionnaire, each woman was mailed a routine reminder to schedule a screening mammogram.

Two months later, 1765 women from this group had not scheduled a mammogram; of the 1765 women, 488 had no prior mammogram and 1277 had a prior mammogram. These women were randomly assigned to receive a reminder postcard (n = 590), a brief reminder phone call (n = 585), or a longer motivational phone call that addressed barriers to mammography (n = 590). Reminder phone calls averaged 3.1 minutes in length, and motivational calls averaged 8.5 minutes. Women contacted by phone could schedule their mammogram during the call, while postcard recipients had to phone in for an appointment. There was no additional cost to the women for the mammograms.

Women who received either the reminder phone call or the motivational phone call were more likely to schedule a mammogram than those receiving the postcard. Specifically, 35.4% of the postcard group scheduled a mammogram within a year, compared with 51.8% of the reminder phone call group and 49.8% of the motivational phone call group. Women with prior mammograms were more than three times more likely to get a mammogram than women without prior mammograms. Women with higher incomes were more likely to get a mammogram, but there was no association between race or more education and getting a mammogram.

The authors note that mammography will achieve its highest potential in reducing breast cancer mortality when large numbers of women are screened regularly. They propose that one approach to increasing participation would be by using interventions in series. For example, if a woman does not schedule a mammogram in response to a reminder card, a reminder phone call could be made. They suggest that doing the simple things first has the potential to increase the proportion of women screened. The authors also conclude that future intervention trials should compare simple and complex interventions to improve our understanding of how interventions work.

Contact: Karen Szabo, Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, (206) 448-4148; fax (206) 448-4010.

Note: This memo to reporters is from the Journal staff and is not an official release of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) or Oxford University Press (OUP) nor does it reflect NCI or OUP policy. In addition, unless otherwise stated, all articles and items published in the Journal reflect the individual views of the authors and not necessarily the official points of view held by NCI, any other component of the U.S. government, OUP, or the organizations with which the authors are affiliated. Neither NCI nor any other component of the U.S. government nor OUP assumes any responsibility for the completeness of the articles or other items or the accuracy of the conclusions reached therein.



             
Copyright © 2000 Oxford University Press (unless otherwise stated)
Oxford University Press Privacy Policy and Legal Statement