Electronic Patient Messages to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening A Randomized Controlled Trial

Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 1620 Tremont St, Boston, MA 02120, USA.
Archives of internal medicine (Impact Factor: 17.33). 12/2010; 171(7):636-41. DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.467
Source: PubMed


Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of cancer mortality, yet effective screening tests are often underused. Electronic patient messages and personalized risk assessments delivered via an electronic personal health record could increase screening rates.
We conducted a randomized controlled trial in 14 ambulatory health centers involving 1103 patients ranging in age from 50 to 75 years with an active electronic personal health record who were overdue for colorectal cancer screening. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a single electronic message highlighting overdue screening status with a link to a Web-based tool to assess their personal risk of colorectal cancer. The outcomes included colorectal cancer screening rates at 1 and 4 months.
Screening rates were higher at 1 month for patients who received electronic messages than for those who did not (8.3% vs 0.2%, P < .001), but this difference was no longer significant at 4 months (15.8% vs 13.1%, P = .18). Of 552 patients randomized to receive the intervention, 296 (54%) viewed the message, and 47 (9%) used the Web-based risk assessment tool. Among 296 intervention patients who viewed the electronic message, risk tool users were more likely than nonusers to request screening examinations (17% vs 4%, P = .04) and to be screened (30% vs 15%, P = .06). One-fifth of patients (19%) using the risk assessment tool were estimated to have an above-average risk for colorectal cancer.
Electronic messages to patients produce an initial increase in colorectal cancer screening rates, but this effect is not sustained over time.
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01032746.


Available from: Graham A Colditz
  • Source
    • "mailed reminder 21860 44 * 15 Group 2: usual care 38.1 Lee et al. (2009) [23] FOBT screening after intervention Group 1: mailed educational reminder and FOBT 775 64.4 * 6 Group 2: usual care 48.4 Sequist et al. (2011) [24] "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Colorectal cancer ranks as one of the most incidental and death malignancies worldwide. Colorectal cancer screening has proven its benefit in terms of incidence and mortality reduction in randomized controlled trials. In fact, it has been recommended by medical organizations either in average-risk or family-risk populations. Success of a screening campaign highly depends on how compliant the target population is. Several factors influence colorectal cancer screening uptake including sociodemographics, provider and healthcare system factors, and psychosocial factors. Awareness of the target population of colorectal cancer and screening is crucial in order to increase screening participation rates. Knowledge about this disease and its prevention has been used across studies as a measurement of public awareness. Some studies found a positive relationship between knowledge about colorectal cancer, risk perception, and attitudes (perceived benefits and barriers against screening) and willingness to participate in a colorectal cancer screening campaign. The mentioned factors are modifiable and therefore susceptible of intervention. In fact, interventional studies focused on average-risk population have tried to increase colorectal cancer screening uptake by improving public knowledge and modifying attitudes. In the present paper, we reviewed the factors impacting adherence to colorectal cancer screening and interventions targeting participants for increasing screening uptake.
    03/2014; 2014:425787. DOI:10.1155/2014/425787
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Novel interventions aimed at increasing colorectal cancer screening are needed to reduce mortality from this preventable disease. Two randomized controlled trials have found that a multicomponent outreach program increased screening rates by ∼6% among patients with an expired colonoscopy order, while personalized electronic messages had no sustainable effect on screening rates.
    Nature Reviews Gastroenterology &#38 Hepatology 07/2011; 8(8):421-2. DOI:10.1038/nrgastro.2011.123 · 12.61 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite numerous trials, the question of whether to use ciclosporin or tacrolimus treatment following liver transplantation in patients with HCV infection is still unresolved. A large retrospective analysis now indicates that tacrolimus is preferable; however, several limitations of this study must be considered.
    Nature Reviews Gastroenterology &#38 Hepatology 07/2011; 8(8):422-4. DOI:10.1038/nrgastro.2011.124 · 12.61 Impact Factor
Show more