Randomized Trial Evaluating the Effectiveness of a "Targeted Communication" With the General Practitioner Involvement in Cancer Screening Invitation Letters
Trial Snapshot
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Status
- Completed
- Sponsor
- University Hospital, Tours
- Enrollment
- 53,978
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Evaluate the effect on the participation (of the population) in cancer screening of an intervention involving the general practitioner (integration of signature) in the invitation letters
Study Overview
Brief Summary
Our goal is to evaluate, in France, the effectiveness (in terms of participation) of the general practitioner involvement (signature) and a more personalized communication in invitation letters to organized screening of breast, colorectal and cervical cancers.
The hypothesis on which this project is based is that communication is probably more effective if the "receiver" feels personally targeted by invitation letters (Dear Martin, I am writing ...) and if he knows "the issuer "(his general practitioner rather an unknown person).
Study Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Intervention Model
- Parallel
- Primary Purpose
- Screening
- Masking
- Single (Participant)
Eligibility Criteria
- Ages
- 25 Years to 74 Years (Adult, Older Adult)
- Sex
- All
- Accepts Healthy Volunteers
- No
Inclusion Criteria
- •Living in Indre-et-Loire (french territorial division 37)
- •Be affiliated to the following three health insurance companies: CPAM (Caisse Primaire d'Assurance Maladie), MSA (Mutualité Sociale Agricole), or RSI (Régime social des Indépendants)
- •Having declared (to health insurance company) an attending physician who has given its written consent to participate in the study
- •Present no exclusion criterion to cancer screening ( for each one)
- •Be old from 50 to 74 years (breast and colorectal cancer) or from 25 to 65 years (cervical cancer)
Exclusion Criteria
- Not provided
Arms & Interventions
1: standard invitation
Group 1: sending a standard invitation signed by the coordinating doctor (send by the structure responsible for organized screenings)
Intervention : Normal invitation
Intervention: Normal invitation (Other)
2: Revised invitation
Group 2: Sending a revised invitation ( text, layout) signed by the coordinating doctor (send by the structure responsible for organized screenings)
Intervention : revised invitation signed by the coordinating doctor
Intervention: revised invitation signed by the coordinating doctor (Other)
3 : revised invitation signed by the attending physician
Group 3: Sending a revised invitation signed by the attending physician (send by the structure responsible for organized screenings)
Intervention : Revised invitation signed by the attending physician
Intervention: Revised invitation signed by the attending physician (Other)
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Evaluate the effect on the participation (of the population) in cancer screening of an intervention involving the general practitioner (integration of signature) in the invitation letters
Time Frame: 9 or 12 months after the invitation letters
The participation / non participation will be measured for each cancer screening (breast, colorectal and cervical) : * 9 months after the invitation letters for breast and colorectal cancers * 12 months after the invitation letters for cervical cancer The participation rate is defined as the number of people having participated, divided by the total number of people in the group or subgroup considered. Analysis by comparing the participation rates between groups (Group 1, Group 2 and Group 3) and sub-groups will be done.
Secondary Outcomes
- Evaluate the effectiveness on the participation (of the population) of the use of a simplified and more focused communication in the invitation letters : comparison of the participation rates in arm 1 (normal invitation) and arm 2 (revised invitation)(9 or 12 months after the invitation letters)
- Cost-effectiveness of different strategies for each cancer screening (breast, colorectal and cervical) as measured by cost effectiveness ratio (total costs in Euros divided by total screened people)(9 or 12 months after the invitation letters)
- Evaluate the effectiveness on the participation (of the population) of the two types of general practitioner signature (typed versus typed + handwritten) by comparing the participation rates between two sub-groups in the arm 3.(9 or 12 months after the invitation letters)