Process outcomes from a randomized controlled trial comparing tailored mammography interventions delivered via telephone versus DVD

Objective Tailored, interactive mammography-promotion interventions can increase adherence if women are exposed to and find them usable. We compare exposure to and usability of interventions delivered via telephone vs. DVD. Methods Process evaluation measures from 926 women randomly assigned to telephone or DVD intervention and completing post-intervention surveys. Results ∼83% of each group reported exposure to all content. Partial exposure was higher for DVD (9% vs. 0.4%; p < .01); no exposure was higher for phone (15% vs. 8%; p < .01). There were no differences in exposure by age or race. Full phone exposure was less likely for women who already made mammography appointments. Usability rating was higher for DVD (p < .05), driven by ratings of understandability and length. Usability of both interventions was correlated with lower baseline barriers, and higher fear, benefits, and self efficacy. Higher ratings for phone were associated with lower knowledge and contemplating mammography. Non-whites rated DVD better than whites. Conclusion Both tailored interactive interventions had wide reach and favorable ratings, but DVD recipients had greatest exposure to at least partial content and more favorable ratings, especially among non-white women. Practice implications This first evaluation of a tailored, interactive DVD provides promise for its use in mammography promotion

Randomized trial of DVD, telephone, and usual care for increasing mammography adherence

The purpose of this study was to test an intervention to increase mammography screening in women 51-75 years of age who had not received a mammogram in the last 15 months. A total of 1681 women were randomized to (1) a mailed tailored interactive DVD, (2) a computer-tailored telephone counseling, or (3) usual care. Women with income below US$75,000 who were in the interactive DVD group had significantly more mammograms than women in usual care. Women with income above US$75,000 had significantly fewer mammograms than women with income less than US$75,000 regardless of group. Further investigation is needed to understand why women with income above US$75,000 did not show the same benefit of the intervention