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
. 2021 Dec;28(4):419-425.
doi: 10.1177/0969141321997480. Epub 2021 Feb 27.

Including a general practice endorsement letter with the testing kit in the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme: Results of a cluster randomised trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Including a general practice endorsement letter with the testing kit in the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme: Results of a cluster randomised trial

Amanda J Cross et al. J Med Screen. 2021 Dec.

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the effect of general practitioner endorsement accompanying the screening kit rather than with the invitation letter on participation in the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme and on the socioeconomic gradient in participation in the Programme.

Methods: The NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in England is delivered via five regional hubs. In early 2016, we carried out a cluster-randomised trial, with hub-day of invitation as the randomisation unit. We randomised 150 hub-days of invitation to the intervention group, GP endorsement on the letter accompanying the guaiac faecal occult blood testing kit (75 hub-days, 197,366 individuals) or control, usual letter (75 hub-days, 197,476 individuals). The endpoint was participation, defined as return of a valid kit within 18 weeks of initial invitation. Because of the cluster randomisation, data were analysed by a hierarchical logistic regression, allowing a random effect for date of invitation. Socioeconomic status was represented by the index of multiple deprivation.

Results: Participation was 59.4% in the intervention group and 58.7% in the control group, a significant difference (p = 0.04). There was no heterogeneity of the effect of intervention by index of multiple deprivation. We found that there was some confounding between date and screening episode order (first or subsequent screen). This in turn may have induced confounding with age and slightly diluted the result.

Conclusions: General practitioner endorsement induces a modest increase in participation in bowel cancer screening, but does not affect the socioeconomic gradient. When considering cluster randomisation as a research method, careful scrutiny of potential confounding is indicated in advance if possible and in analysis otherwise.

Keywords: Bowel cancer; GP endorsement; cluster randomised trial.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources