Okatch H, Nkala B, Beltrami J, Poy E, Parmer D, Nkala J, Olawole F
Thomas Jefferson University, College of Population Health, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Biology Department/ Public Health Program, Franklin & Marshall College, Lancaster, PA, USA.
Public Health Pract (Oxf). 2022 Sep 23;4:100321. doi: 10.1016/j.puhip.2022.100321. eCollection 2022 Dec.
To examine the efficacy of direct mailing using four types of messaging on promoting the uptake of residential lead remediation (RLR) funds in Lancaster, PA, USA.
We designed a quasi-experiment to assess the effect of 4 RLR messages sent to households in Lancaster, PA by direct mail between September and December 2020: a brief flyer (F); a detailed brochure + the flyer (BF); a health infographic + the flyer (IF); and an application form + the flyer (AFF).
Mailers were sent to addresses in four census tracts; each census tract received a different message. Both English and Spanish versions were sent. The outcomes were the event rate defined as the number of phone call inquiries received, and the number of applications received. The association between type of messaging and household type (owner-vs renter-occupied) was assessed using a chi square test.
The event rates for the renter-occupied households were lower than for owner-occupied households, regardless of treatment. The event rates for renter-occupied households in the F, BF, IF and AFF groups were 0.00%, 0.35%, 0.12% and 0.18% respectively compared to 0.93%, 0.45%, 0.86% and 1.32% for homeowners. More applications were received from homeowners, and the event rate of the owner-occupied households was significantly different from that of renter-occupied homes (p-value = 0.001).
Event rates and applications received were higher for owner-occupied households than they were for renter-occupied households. Direct mailing of RLR information is feasible especially if households at high risk for lead poisoning are targeted.
研究在美国宾夕法尼亚州兰卡斯特市使用四种类型的信息进行直邮宣传,以促进居民铅污染治理(RLR)资金使用的效果。
我们设计了一项准实验,以评估2020年9月至12月期间通过直邮发送给宾夕法尼亚州兰卡斯特市家庭的4种RLR信息的效果:一份简短传单(F);一份详细手册 + 传单(BF);一份健康信息图表 + 传单(IF);以及一份申请表 + 传单(AFF)。
邮件被发送到四个普查区的地址;每个普查区收到不同的信息。同时发送了英文和西班牙文版本。结果指标为事件发生率,定义为接到的电话咨询数量以及收到的申请数量。使用卡方检验评估信息类型与家庭类型(自有住房与租赁住房)之间的关联。
无论接受何种处理,租赁住房家庭的事件发生率均低于自有住房家庭。F组、BF组、IF组和AFF组中租赁住房家庭的事件发生率分别为0.00%、0.35%、0.12%和0.18%,而自有住房家庭的这一比例分别为0.93%、0.45%、0.86%和1.32%。自有住房家庭收到的申请更多,自有住房家庭的事件发生率与租赁住房家庭的事件发生率存在显著差异(p值 = 0.001)。
自有住房家庭的事件发生率和收到的申请数量高于租赁住房家庭。直接邮寄RLR信息是可行的,特别是如果将铅中毒高危家庭作为目标对象。