- Volume 13 Issue 3
DOI QR Code
Effectiveness of Interventions to Increase the Participation Rate of Gastric Cancer Screening in the Republic of Korea: a Pilot study
- Lee, Myung-Ha (National Cancer Control Institute, National Cancer Center) ;
- Lee, Yoon-Young (National Cancer Control Institute, National Cancer Center) ;
- Jung, Da-Won (Health Resource Assessment Department, Health insurance Review & Assessment Service) ;
- Park, Bo-Young (National Cancer Control Institute, National Cancer Center) ;
- Yun, E-Hwa (National Cancer Control Institute, National Cancer Center) ;
- Lee, Hoo-Yeon (Department of Social Medicine, College of Medicine, Dankook University) ;
- Jun, Jae-Kwan (National Cancer Control Institute, National Cancer Center) ;
- Choi, Kui-Son (National Cancer Control Institute, National Cancer Center)
- Published : 2012.03.31
This study assessed the effectiveness of three intervention strategies to improve the participation rate of gastric cancer screening among people who had never undergone such screening, and those who had been screened for the disease, but not recently. It was conducted in the Ilsandong-gu District of Goyang City, Korea. The population for the current study was restricted to male residents, aged 40-65 years, who received an invitation letter to undergo gastric cancer screening from the National Health Insurance (NHI) Corporation at the beginning of 2010. The subjects were divided into two categories according to their screening history: never-screened, and ever-screened. A total of 2,065 men were eligible: 803 never-screened and 1,262 ever-screened. In each screening category they were randomly assigned to one of three intervention groups: 1) tailored telephone counseling; 2) tailored postcard reminder after tailored telephone counseling;and 3) tailored telephone counseling after tailored postcard reminder. At 3 months post-intervention, never-screened men with any intervention were more likely to undergo gastric cancer screening (OR=2.75, 95% CI: 1.22-6.18) compared to those in the reference group (no intervention). However, there was no statistically significant intervention effect in ever-screened men (OR=1.21, 95% CI: 0.65-2.27). Examination of the intervention effects by intervention group among never-screened men showed that those in the postcard reminder after telephone counseling group to be statistically significantly more likely to undergo gastric cancer screening (OR=4.49, 95% CI: 1.79-11.29) than the reference group (no intervention). Our results highlight that use of tailored postcard reminders after tailored telephone counseling is an effective method to increase participation in gastric cancer screening among men who had never been screened.
Supported by : National Cancer Center
- Baron RC, Rimer BK, Coates RJ, et al(2008). Client-directed interventions to increase community access to breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening a systematic review. Am J Prev Med, 35, S56-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.04.001
- Bonfill X, Marzo M, Pladevall M, et al(2001). Strategies for increasing women participation in community breast cancer screening. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, CD002943.
- Bowie JV, Curbow BA, Garza MA, et al (2005). A review of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening interventions in older women. Cancer Control, 12 Suppl 2, 58-69.
- Champion V, Maraj M, Hui S, et al (2003). Comparison of tailored interventions to increase mammography screening in nonadherent older women. Prev Med, 36, 150-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0091-7435(02)00038-5
- Champion V, Skinner CS, Hui S, et al (2007). The effect of telephone versus print tailoring for mammography adherence. Patient Educ Couns, 65, 416-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2006.09.014
- Choi KS, Kwak MS, Lee HY, et al (2009). Screening for gastric cancer in Korea: population-based preferences for endoscopy versus upper gastrointestinal series. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 18, 1390-8. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0940
- Davis NA, Lewis MJ, Rimer BK, et al (1997). Evaluation of a phone intervention to promote mammography in a managed care plan. Am J Health Promot, 11, 247-9. https://doi.org/10.4278/0890-1171-11.4.247
- Davis NA, Nash E, Bailey C, et al (1997). Evaluation of three methods for improving mammography rates in a managed care plan. Am J Prev Med, 13, 298-302. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(18)30179-X
- Drossaert CH, Boer H, Seydel ER (1996). Health education to improve repeat participation in the Dutch breast cancer screening programme: evaluation of a leaflet tailored to previous participants. Patient Educ Couns, 28, 121-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/0738-3991(96)00889-0
- Ellis P, Robinson P, Ciliska D, et al (2005). A systematic review of studies evaluating diffusion and dissemination of selected cancer control interventions. Health Psychol, 24, 488-500. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6184.108.40.2068
- Ferlay J SH, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM (2008). Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC. In. GLOBOCAN Cancer Base No. 10 [internet].
- Hahm MI, Choi KS, Lee HY, et al (2011). Who participates in the gastric cancer screening and on-time rescreening in the National Cancer Screening Program? A populationbased study in Korea. Cancer Sci, 102, 2241-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1349-7006.2011.02090.x
- Kim Y, Jun JK, Choi KS, et al (2011). Overview of the National Cancer screening programme and the cancer screening status in Korea. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 12, 725-30.
- King ES, Rimer BK, Seay J, et al (1994). Promoting mammography use through progressive interventions: is it effective? Am J Public Health, 84, 104-6. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.84.1.104
- Kreuter MW, Strecher VJ (1996). Do tailored behavior change messages enhance the effectiveness of health risk appraisal? Results from a randomized trial. Health Educ Res, 11, 97-105. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/11.1.97
- Lantz PM, Stencil D, Lippert MT, et al (1995). Breast and cervical cancer screening in a low-income managed care sample: the efficacy of physician letters and phone calls. Am J Public Health, 85, 834-6. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.85.6.834
- Lee KS, Oh DK, Han MA, et al (2011). Gastric cancer screening in Korea: report on the national cancer screening program in 2008. Cancer Res Treat, 43, 83-8. https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2011.43.2.83
- Legler J, Meissner HI, Coyne C, et al (2002). The effectiveness of interventions to promote mammography among women with historically lower rates of screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 11, 59-71.
- Marcus AC, Bastani R, Reardon K, et al (1993). Proactive screening mammography counseling within the Cancer Information Service: results from a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr, 119-29.
- Meldrum P, Turnbull D, Dobson HM, et al (1994). Tailored written invitations for second round breast cancer screening: a randomised controlled trial. J Med Screen, 1, 245-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/096914139400100412
- Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, et al (2005). Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin, 55, 74-108. https://doi.org/10.3322/canjclin.55.2.74
- Pisani P, Oliver WE, Parkin DM, et al (1994). Case-control study of gastric cancer screening in Venezuela. Br J Cancer, 69, 1102-5. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1994.216
- Richardson JL, Mondrus GT, Danley K, et al (1996). Impact of a mailed intervention on annual mammography and physician breast examinations among women at high risk of breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 5, 71-6.
- Rimer BK, Glassman B (1998). Tailoring communications for primary care settings. Methods Inf Med, 37, 171-7. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1634520
- Rimer BK, Halabi S, Sugg Skinner C, et al (2001). The shortterm impact of tailored mammography decision-making interventions. Patient Educ Couns, 43, 269-85.
- Rimer BK, Halabi S, Sugg Skinner C, et al (2002). Effects of a mammography decision-making intervention at 12 and 24 months. Am J Prev Med, 22, 247-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(02)00417-8
- Saywell RM, Jr., Champion VL, Skinner CS, et al (1999). Cost-effectiveness comparison of five interventions to increase mammography screening. Prev Med, 29, 374-82. https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.1999.0568
- Shin HR, Won YJ, Jung KW, et al (2005). Nationwide cancer incidence in Korea, 1999-2001; first result using the national cancer incidence database. Cancer Res Treat, 37, 325-31. https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2005.37.6.325
- Skinner CS, Campbell MK, Rimer BK, et al (1999). How effective is tailored print communication? Ann Behav Med, 21, 290-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02895960
- Skinner CS, Strecher VJ, Hospers H (1994). Physicians' recommendations for mammography: do tailored messages make a difference? Am J Public Health, 84, 43- 9. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.84.1.43
- Snell JL, Buck EL (1996). Increasing cancer screening: a meta-analysis. Prev Med, 25, 702-7. https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.1996.0109
- Stone EG, Morton SC, Hulscher ME, et al (2002). Interventions that increase use of adult immunization and cancer screening services: a meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med, 136, 641-51. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-136-9-200205070-00006
- Vogt TM, Glass A, Glasgow RE, et al (2003). The safety net: a cost-effective approach to improving breast and cervical cancer screening. J Womens Health (Larchmt), 12, 789- 98. https://doi.org/10.1089/154099903322447756
- Wagner TH (1998). The effectiveness of mailed patient reminders on mammography screening: a meta-analysis. Am J Prev Med, 14, 64-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(97)00003-2
- Factors Associated with the Use of Gastric Cancer Screening Services in Korea: The Fourth Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2008 (KNHANES IV) vol.13, pp.8, 2012, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2012.13.8.3773
- Relationship between Social Network and Stage of Adoption of Gastric Cancer Screening among the Korean Population vol.14, pp.10, 2013, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2013.14.10.6095
- What is the Most Effective Strategy for Improving the Cancer Screening Rate in Japan? vol.15, pp.6, 2014, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.6.2607
- Cancer screening in Koreans: a focus group approach vol.18, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5147-9