None listed
Conditions
Brief summary
Improved participation in screening for bowel cancer is desirable. Large scale screening programs must recruit invitees through comprehensive population registers. Depending on the country and health system these may be primary care practice lists or other registers such as the electoral roll. If primary care patient lists are available, considerable practice time may be required to organise the screening program, alternatively the implicit practice endorsement of screening may increase the participation rate to make that investment worthwhile. As screening is most effective when conducted regularly, it is important to determine if any increase in participation rate due to practice or practitioner endorsement is maintained over several rounds of screening offers. This study aims to follow screening participation over 4 rounds of offers in 4 treatment groups, and to use innovative statistical methods to determine the value of practice involvement in re-sceening participation.
Interventions
The aim is to determine the value of GP endorsement for faecal occult blood test based re-screening colorectal cancer. The interventions are conducted within the setting of a population screening program where invitees are recruited from general practice patient lists.
Intervention 1: Invitation letter to re-screen on central screening facility letterhead with statement from invitee's general practice endorsing participation in screening, signed by screening coordinator.
Intervention 2: Invitat
The aim is to determine the value of GP endorsement for faecal occult blood test based re-screening colorectal cancer. The interventions are conducted within the setting of a population screening program where invitees are recruited from general practice patient lists. Intervention 1: Invitation letter to re-screen on central screening facility letterhead with statement from invitee's general practice endorsing participation in screening, signed by screening coordinator. Intervention 2: Invitation letter to rescreen on practice letterhead with statement from practice endorsing screening, signed by invitee's general practitioner. Comparison group: recruited from electoral roll receiving control invitation to rescreen. Duration: Four annual rounds of screening offers. All people received the same invitation type over the 4 rounds of screening invitations.
Sponsors
Prof. Graeme Young MD, FRACP
Study design
Allocation
Randomised controlled trial
Intervention model
Parallel
Primary purpose
Prevention
Masking
Blinded (masking used)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Age
50 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
All people on patient lists of 2 general practices.
Exclusion criteria
People identified by the collaborating practices and practitioners as having gastrointestinal conditions that invalidate screening results, people with mental and physical disabilities that prevent them from following the study protocol, people known to have had a neoplasia negative colonoscopy 5 years prior to a screening offer, people who inform the screening facility that they do not want further contact.
Outcome results
None listed