Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2010 Jun;48(6):553-7.
doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181dbd8eb.

Cost-effectiveness of patient mailings to promote colorectal cancer screening

Thomas D Sequist  1 , Calvin Franz, John Z Ayanian
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Cost-effectiveness of patient mailings to promote colorectal cancer screening

Thomas D Sequist et al. Med Care. 2010 Jun.

Abstract

Background: Programs to promote colorectal cancer screening are common, yet information regarding the cost-effectiveness of such efforts is limited.

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of patient mailings to increase rates of colorectal cancer screening.

Research design: Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized, controlled trial. The intervention involved 21,860 patients aged 50 to 80 years across 11 health centers overdue for colorectal cancer screening. Patients were randomized to receive a mailing that included a tailored letter, educational brochure, and fecal occult blood test kit at baseline and 6 months follow-up.

Measures: We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness of these mailings to promote colorectal cancer screening by fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy using internal cost estimates of labor and supplies.

Results: Colorectal cancer screening rates were higher for patients in the intervention compared with control patients (44% vs. 38%, P < 0.001). The total cost of the intervention was approximately $5.48 per patient, resulting in a cost-effectiveness ratio of $94 per additional patient screened. This estimate ranged from $69 to $156, based on assumptions of the cost of the intervention components, magnitude of intervention effect, age range, and size of the targeted patient population.

Conclusion: Tailored patient mailings are a cost-effective approach to improve rates of colorectal cancer screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Murray T, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008;58:71–96. - PubMed
    1. Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, Snover DC, Bradley GM, Schuman LM, Ederer F. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med. 1993;328:1365–1371. - PubMed
    1. Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MH, Moss SM, Amar SS, Balfour TW, James PD, Mangham CM. Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet. 1996;348:1472–1477. - PubMed
    1. Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, Jorgensen OD, Sondergaard O. Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet. 1996;348:1467–1471. - PubMed
    1. Selby JV, Friedman GD, Quesenberry CP, Jr, Weiss NS. A case-control study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 1992;326:653–657. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms