Introduction 
Participation in mammographic screening for breast cancer in Australia is approximately 54% among the general population, but screening among women from some culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds is lower. BreastScreen Victoria apply strategies to increase screening including reminder letters and phone calls; however, these are usually provided in English. Using intervention strategies generated from the Ophelia (OPtimise HEalth LIteracy and Access) community co-design process, translated mammography reminder letters and in-language phone calls were tested within two randomised control trials (RCTs).


Methods and analysis 
Women aged 50–75 years who were due for their 2-yearly screening mammography (for RCT#1) or were under-screened, i.e. ≥27 months since last screen (for RCT#2) were randomised into intervention or control groups. RCT#1 compared sending women routine reminder letters (English only) with translated (Arabic or Italian) letters. RCT#2 compared reminder telephone calls to women in their preferred language (Arabic or Italian) to no telephone call. The primary outcome for each trial was screening booking rates within 14-days. Primary outcomes were tested using Pearson’s chi-square test. Rates within language group (incidence ratio: IR) were compared using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test.


Results 
For RCT#1 (letters) 1,032 women were randomised into the intervention arm or to usual care. Uptake of screening bookings was similar between both groups, with no differences observed by language group. For RCT#2 (phone calls), 195 women were randomised to the intervention group or to usual care. Overall, 64.2% of women in the intervention arm and 6% in the control arm booked a screening appointment within 14 days (p<0.0001). The IR (95%CI) of booking was 10.1 (3.9, 26.3) times higher among Italian women, and 11.6 (2.9, 46.5) times higher among Arabic women in the intervention compared to usual care groups.


Discussion and conclusion 
A service improvement initiative derived from community members and breast screen providers was found to be highly effective. This evidence informed the service provider, BreastScreen Victoria, who have implemented these improvements into routine practice to improve screening among CALD groups and reduce health inequalities.

/pdf/the-impact-of-translated-reminder-letters-and-phone-calls-on-2xuxlpcg37.pdf

The impact of translated reminder letters and phone calls on mammography screening booking rates: Two randomised controlled trials.

This year marks 20 years since the Agency for Health care Research and Quality (AHRQ) first provided practice-based research network (PBRN) infrastructure funding in 2000. However, practice-based research in US primary care settings began over 40 years ago with a vision to engage community-based

Practice-based Research Network (PBRN) Engagement: 20+ Years and Counting

https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:cd6db5f/UQcd6db5f_OA.pdf

Bringing new plasma donors back: testing the efficacy of telephone and e‐mail communications with first‐time donors

In our primary care organization, we have observed income gradients in cancer screening for our patients despite outreach. We hypothesized that outreach strategies could be improved upon to be more compelling for our patients living with low income. To use co-design to adapt our current strategies and create new strategies to improve cancer screening uptake for patients living with low income. An exploratory, qualitative study in two phases: interviews and focus groups. For interviews, we recruited 25 patient participants who were or had been overdue for cancer screening and had been identified by their provider as potentially living with low income. For subsequent focus groups, we recruited 14 patient participants, 11 of whom had participated in Phase I interviews. To analyse written transcripts, we took an iterative, inductive approach using content analysis and drawing on best practices in Grounded Theory methodology. Emergent themes were expanded and clarified to create a derived model of possible strategies to improve the experience of cancer screening and encourage screening uptake for patients living with low income. Fear and competing priorities were two key barriers to cancer screening identified by patients. Patients believed that a warm and encouraging outreach approach would work best to increase cancer screening participation. Phone calls and group education were specifically suggested as potentially promising methods. However, these views were not universal; for example, women were more likely to be in favour of group education. We used input from patients living with low income to co-design a new approach to cancer screening in our primary care organization, an approach that could be broadly applicable to other contexts and settings. We learned from our patients that a multi-modal strategy will likely be best to maximize screening uptake.

/pdf/a-tea-and-cookies-approach-co-designing-cancer-screening-44mn23zqbb.pdf

A "Tea and Cookies" Approach: Co-designing Cancer Screening Interventions with Patients Living with Low Income.

Primary health care (PHC) plays a vital support role in organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs by encouraging patient participation and ensuring timely referral for diagnostic assessment follow up. A systematic scoping review of the current evidence was conducted to inform strategies that better engage the PHC sector in organised CRC screening programs. Articles published from 2005 to November 2019 were searched across five databases. Evidence was synthesised and interventions that specifically require PHC involvement were mapped to stages of the CRC screening pathway. Fifty-seven unique studies were identified in which patient, provider and system-level interventions align with defined stages of the CRC screening pathway: namely, identifying/reminding patients who have not responded to CRC screening (non-adherence) (n=46) and follow up of a positive screen referral (n=11). Self-management support initiatives (patient level) and improvement initiatives (system level) demonstrate consistent benefits along the CRC screening pathway. Interventions evaluated as part of a quality-improvement process tended to report effectiveness; however, the variation in reporting makes it difficult to determine which elements contributed to the overall study outcomes. To maximise the benefits of population-based screening programs, better integration into existing primary care services can be achieved through targeting preventive and quality care interventions along the entire screening pathway.

/pdf/from-participation-to-diagnostic-assessment-a-systematic-3a7o53n7dj.pdf

From participation to diagnostic assessment: a systematic scoping review of the role of the primary healthcare sector in the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program.

Background: There is good evidence that cancer-specific patient outreach improves rates of cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening. However, it is unclear how primary care practices should implement integrated outreach for all 3 types of cancer screening. We aimed to understand whether integrated outreach using mailed letters or phone calls were more effective at increasing screening uptake in a primary care organization. Method: We conducted a pragmatic randomized trial comparing outreach by mailed letter or personalized phone call for patients overdue for cervical, breast, or colorectal cancer screening. The study was conducted at 6 clinics within an academic primary care organization in Toronto, Canada. Our primary outcome was an uptake of at least 1 screening test for which the patient was overdue. Our primary analysis was an intention-to-treat, unadjusted comparison of proportions, using a χ 2 test. We also compared costs per additional patient screened. All analyses were stratified by sex. Results: A total of 3733 females and 1537 males were randomized to receive 1 of the interventions. Among women, 33.0% allocated to receive a reminder letter and 41.2% allocated to receive a reminder phone call received at least 1 screening test for which they were due (absolute difference, 8.1%; 95% CI, 5.1%–11.2%, P P = .073). For women and men, the letters cost approximately CaD $5.07 and CaD $7.16, respectively, for each completed screening test compared with CaD $8.71 and CaD $12.00 for the phone calls. Conclusions: Phone calls were more effective than mailed letters at increasing uptake for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening among women. However, phone calls were more expensive than letters. Primary care practices should consider integrating phone call reminders into their practice, possibly as part of a targeted or staged approach to outreach for cancer screening.

Sam Davie

Papers

Mailed Letter Versus Phone Call to Increase Uptake of Cancer Screening: A Pragmatic, Randomized Trial