Galor Anna, Cybulski Cezary, Lubiński Jan, Narod Steven A, Gronwald Jacek
Department of Genetics and Pathology, International Hereditary Cancer Center, Pomeranian Medical University, Połabska 4, 70-115 Szczecin, Poland.
Hered Cancer Clin Pract. 2013 Dec 10;11(1):17. doi: 10.1186/1897-4287-11-17.
The effectiveness of a genetics-based public health screening programs depend on the successful recruitment of subjects who qualify for intensified screening by virtue of a positive genetic test. Herein we compare the effectiveness of a mailed invitation and follow-up phone call for non-responding subjects and an initial invitation by telephone addressed to male BRCA1 mutation carriers for prostate screening.The final participation rate was 75% (42 of 56) for men who were initially contacted by mail (and follow-up phone call) and 81% (30 of 37) for men who were initially contacted by telephone. Among the men who were initially contacted by mail, it was necessary to telephone 54% of these patients (30 of 56).After a calculation of the cost-effectiveness related to these results, we conclude that if the costs of the phone call were to exceed the costs of the letter by 2.5 times or more, then savings would be arranged by initiating contact with a mailed invitation.
基于遗传学的公共卫生筛查项目的有效性取决于能否成功招募到因基因检测呈阳性而符合强化筛查条件的受试者。在此，我们比较了对无回应受试者邮寄邀请并进行后续电话随访与对携带BRCA1基因突变的男性进行前列腺筛查时最初通过电话邀请的效果。最初通过邮件（及后续电话随访）联系的男性最终参与率为75%（56人中的42人），最初通过电话联系的男性最终参与率为81%（37人中的30人）。在最初通过邮件联系的男性中，有必要对其中54%的患者（56人中的30人）进行电话随访。在对这些结果的成本效益进行计算后，我们得出结论：如果电话随访的成本超过信件成本2.5倍或更多，那么通过邮寄邀请开始联系将节省费用。
