Objective: To compare the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of two reminding strategies addressed to women who did not respond to a first invitation to undergo cervical cancer screening. Study Design: A randomized study was carried out by a programme created in Alsace to organize cervical cancer screening. In total, 10,662 women who did not have a smear test 1 year after a first notice was sent, were randomly allocated to receive either a new letter with a reply coupon or a telephone call. The uptake of screening was measured using routine data. Efficacy and direct costs of the two methods were compared. Results: Uptake at 8 months was 6.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.6–7.0%] for telephone calls and 5.8% (95% CI 5.2–6.4%) for letters. The difference was not significant. More information was collected through telephone calls than by letters, but with less reliability. Furthermore, telephone calls were more costly. Conclusions: We found that in our region, a mail reminder was as effective as, and less expensive than, a telephone call; moreover, it was applicable to the whole population, including patients without a telephone.

Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.