18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Offering an app to book cervical screening appointments: A service evaluation

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          To assess the feasibility of offering women who are overdue for cervical screening the use of a smartphone app to book their appointment.

          Methods

          Women who were at least six months overdue for cervical screening in three general practice surgeries in a deprived East London borough were identified from practice records. Staff sent batches of text messages informing women that they were overdue for screening, and inviting them to download an app to book their appointment.

          Results

          Across the three practices, 2632 eligible women were identified. Valid mobile phone numbers were available for 1465 women. One woman had opted out of receiving text messages, so messages were sent to 1464 women. Of these, 158 (11%) booked a screening appointment within five months. The majority of these women booked without using the app (72%; 113/158); just over a quarter booked via the app (28%; 45/158).

          Conclusions

          Just over 10% of cervical screening non-attenders booked an appointment in response to a text message with a link to a downloadable app; however, only one in four of these women booked using the app. This suggests that the text message reminder was likely to have been the key ‘active ingredient’ for most women, rather than the app itself. Future research could explore the optimal message for a text reminder in this context and evaluate the inclusion of a link to existing online booking systems.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Impact of cervical screening on cervical cancer mortality: estimation using stage-specific results from a nested case–control study

          Background: It is well established that screening can prevent cervical cancer, but the magnitude of the impact of regular screening on cervical cancer mortality is unknown. Methods: Population-based case–control study using prospectively recorded cervical screening data, England 1988–2013. Case women had cervical cancer diagnosed during April 2007–March 2013 aged 25–79 years (N=11 619). Two cancer-free controls were individually age matched to each case. We used conditional logistic regression to estimate the odds ratio (OR) of developing stage-specific cancer for women regularly screened or irregularly screened compared with women not screened in the preceding 15 years. Mortality was estimated from excess deaths within 5 years of diagnosis using stage-specific 5-year relative survival from England with adjustment for age within stage based on SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results, USA) data. Results: In women aged 35–64 years, regular screening is associated with a 67% (95% confidence interval (CI): 62–73%) reduction in stage 1A cancer and a 95% (95% CI: 94–97%) reduction in stage 3 or worse cervical cancer: the estimated OR comparing regular (⩽5.5yearly) screening to no (or minimal) screening are 0.18 (95% CI: 0.16–0.19) for cancer incidence and 0.08 (95% CI: 0.07–0.09) for mortality. It is estimated that in England screening currently prevents 70% (95% CI: 66–73%) of cervical cancer deaths (all ages); however, if everyone attended screening regularly, 83% (95% CI: 82–84%) could be prevented. Conclusions: The association between cervical cancer screening and incidence is stronger in more advanced stage cancers, and screening is more effective at preventing death from cancer than preventing cancer itself.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Barriers to cervical cancer screening attendance in England: a population-based survey.

            To explore barriers to cervical screening attendance in a population-based sample, and to compare barriers endorsed by women who were up-to-date with screening versus those who were overdue. We also tested the hypothesis that women who were overdue for screening would be more generally disillusioned with public services, as indexed by reported voting behaviour in elections. A population-based survey of women in England. Face-to-face interviews were carried out with 580 women aged 26-64 years, and recruited using stratified random probability sampling as part of an omnibus survey. Questions assessed self-reported cervical screening attendance, barriers to screening, voting behaviour and demographic characteristics. Eighty-five per cent of women were up-to-date with screening and 15% were overdue, including 2.6% who had never had a smear test. The most commonly endorsed barriers were embarrassment (29%), intending to go but not getting round to it (21%), fear of pain (14%) and worry about what the test might find (12%). Only four barriers showed significant independent associations with screening status: difficulty making an appointment, not getting round to going, not being sexually active and not trusting the test. We found support for our hypothesis that women who do not attend for screening are less likely to vote in elections, even when controlling for barrier endorsement and demographic factors. Practical barriers were more predictive of screening uptake than emotional factors such as embarrassment. This has clear implications for service provision and future interventions to increase uptake. The association between voting behaviour and screening uptake lends support to the hypothesis that falling screening coverage may be indicative of a broader phenomenon of disillusionment, and further research in this area is warranted.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Text Messaging Interventions on Cancer Screening Rates: A Systematic Review

              Background Despite high-quality evidence demonstrating that screening reduces mortality from breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers, a substantial portion of the population remains inadequately screened. There is a critical need to identify interventions that increase the uptake and adoption of evidence-based screening guidelines for preventable cancers at the community practice level. Text messaging (short message service, SMS) has been effective in promoting behavioral change in various clinical settings, but the overall impact and reach of text messaging interventions on cancer screening are unknown. Objective The objective of this systematic review was to assess the effect of text messaging interventions on screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers. Methods We searched multiple databases for studies published between the years 2000 and 2017, including PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, to identify controlled trials that measured the effect of text messaging on screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, or lung cancers. Study quality was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results Our search yielded 2238 citations, of which 31 underwent full review and 9 met inclusion criteria. Five studies examined screening for breast cancer, one for cervical cancer, and three for colorectal cancer. No studies were found for lung cancer screening. Absolute screening rates for individuals who received text message interventions were 0.6% to 15.0% higher than for controls. Unadjusted relative screening rates for text message recipients were 4% to 63% higher compared with controls. Conclusions Text messaging interventions appear to moderately increase screening rates for breast and cervical cancer and may have a small effect on colorectal cancer screening. Benefit was observed in various countries, including resource-poor and non-English-speaking populations. Given the paucity of data, additional research is needed to better quantify the effectiveness of this promising intervention.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Med Screen
                J Med Screen
                MSC
                spmsc
                Journal of Medical Screening
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                0969-1413
                1475-5793
                9 September 2019
                June 2020
                : 27
                : 2
                : 85-89
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Behavioural Science and Health, UCL, London, UK
                [2 ]NHS England (London Region)/Public Health England, London, UK
                Author notes
                [*]Jo Waller, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK. Email: j.waller@ 123456ucl.ac.uk
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8165-4978
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4025-9132
                Article
                10.1177_0969141319871312
                10.1177/0969141319871312
                7222961
                31500520
                4a434632-72e2-49e2-9997-c3a0c2cacde8
                © The Author(s) 2019

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License ( http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                : 10 April 2019
                : 1 August 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: UCLH Cancer Collaborative;
                Funded by: Cancer Research UK, FundRef https://doi.org/10.13039/501100000289;
                Award ID: C49896/A17429
                Award ID: C7492/A17219
                Categories
                Original Articles
                Custom metadata
                ts2

                Medicine
                cancer screening,digital health,text message reminders,screening uptake,primary care,behavioural interventions

                Comments

                Comment on this article