Effect of telephone reminder/recall on adolescent immunization and preventive visits: results from a randomized clinical trial. The impact of reminder-recall interventions on low vaccination coverage in an inner-city population. Quality improvement in immunization delivery following an unsuccessful immunization recall. The effect of microcomputer-generated reminders on influenza vaccination rates in a university-based family practice center. A computerized reminder system to increase the use of preventive care for hospitalized patients. Challenges and successes of immunization registry reminders at inner-city practices. Evaluation of a follow-up system in a county health department's immunization clinic. A randomized trial of electronic clinical reminders to improve quality of care for diabetes and coronary artery disease. Evaluation of telephoned computer-generated reminders to improve immunization coverage at inner-city clinics. Opportunistic electronic reminders. Improving performance of preventive care in general practice. Identification and recall of children with chronic medical conditions for influenza vaccination. Effectiveness of a mailed reminder on the immunization levels of infants at high risk of failure to complete immunizations. Use of reminders for preventive procedures in family medicine. Computer-generated physician and patient reminders. Tools to improve population adherence to selected preventive services. A computer-generated reminder system improves physician compliance with diabetes preventive care guidelines. Effect of mailed reminders on the response rate in surveys among patients in general practice. A randomized trial of the effectiveness of computer-generated telephone messages in increasing immunization visits among preschool children. Public health in managed care: a randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of postcard reminders. The use of text messaging to improve attendance in primary care: a randomized controlled trial. Comparison of three methods of recalling patients for influenza vaccination. A controlled trial to improve delivery of preventive care: physician or patient reminders? Use of reminders to increase compliance with tetanus booster vaccination. Computer-generated mailed reminders for influenza immunization: a clinical trial. Effect of enhanced feedback and brief educational reminder messages on laboratory test requesting in primary care: a cluster randomised trial. Computerized medical records and preventive health care: success depends on many factors. Patients and computers as reminders to screen for diabetes in family practice. Randomized-controlled trial. Reminders to physicians from an introspective computer medical record. A two-year randomized trial. Computer-generated recall letters for underimmunized children: how cost-effective? Delayed feedback of physician performance versus immediate reminders to perform preventive care. Effects on physician compliance. Mobile phone technologies improve adherence to antiretroviral treatment in a resource-limited setting: a randomized controlled trial of text message reminders. Improving preventive care at a medical clinic: how can the patient help? Physician response to computer reminders. Impact of resident feedback on immunization outcomes. Use of automated reminders for tuberculin skin test return. Vaccination of high-risk patients for influenza. A comparison of telephone and mail reminder methods. Enhancing influenza immunization. Postcard and telephone reminders and the challenge of immunization site shift. Influenza immunization in a managed care organization. Automated telephone reminders in tuberculosis care. How reminders given to patients and physicians affected pap smear use in a health maintenance organization: results of a randomized controlled trial. A randomised, clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of hospital and community-based reminder systems for increasing uptake of influenza and pneumococcal vaccine in hospitalised patients aged 65 years and over. Do computer-generated reminder letters improve the rate of influenza immunization in an urban pediatric clinic? Improving the immunization coverage of children less than 7 years old in a family practice residency. Patient-specific reminder letters and pediatric well-child-care show rates. Hepatitis A and B vaccination in a sexually transmitted disease clinic for men who have sex with men. A large population-based randomized controlled trial to increase attendance at screening for cervical cancer.
To measure the effect of telephone-based reminder/recall on immunization and well-child care (WCC) visit rates among adolescents in urban practices.
                Randomized clinical trial of telephone-based reminder/recall over 18 months.
                Four urban primary care practices.
                Adolescents aged 11 to 14 years.Intervention Adolescents within practices were randomized to study (n = 1496) or control groups (n = 1510). The study group was sent audiotaped telephone reminders about a scheduled or needed immunization or WCC visit. Households were called weekly if there was no response; telephone numbers were updated weekly. Controls received standard care.
                Baseline demographics and immunization and WCC visit rates were similar for study and control groups. The intervention was largely ineffective in improving immunization or WCC visit rates. Although at the end of the study, the study group had slightly higher hepatitis B coverage (3 vaccinations) (62% vs 57.8%; P = .02), WCC visits were the same (53% and 54%), and impact on other vaccinations was minimal. The effect of reminder/recall was equivalent across demographic subgroups (e.g., age, race/ethnicity, insurance). The major factor limiting intervention effectiveness was inaccurate telephone numbers. Seventy-one percent of study subjects with single telephone numbers throughout the study had a WCC visit vs 25% of study subjects with multiple/changed telephone numbers and 54% of controls (P<.001).
                An intensive telephone reminder and recall system was only minimally successful in improving immunization and WCC visit rates among urban adolescents. Lack of success was largely owing to changed or inaccurate telephone numbers. Reminder-recall interventions have improved immunization rates in numerous studies.
                To evaluate the impact of large-scale, registry-based reminder-recall interventions on low immunization rates in an inner-city population.
                Randomized, controlled, effectiveness trial.
                Fulton County, Georgia.
                A total of 3050 children (76% black, 14% Hispanic, 7% white, and 3% other or unknown; median age, 9 months; range, 1-14 months) identified in an immunization registry as receiving health care in the public sector.
                Each child was randomly assigned to 1 of 4 groups: control (usual care), autodialer (automated telephone or mail reminder recall), outreach (in-person telephone, mail, or home visit recall), and combination (autodialer with outreach backup). Interventions continued until the child reached 24 months of age.
                Completion by the age of 24 months of the 4-3-1-3 vaccination series based on intention-to-treat analysis.
                A total of 260 (34%) of the 763 patients in the control group, 306 (40%) of the 763 in the autodialer group, 284 (37%) of the 760 in the outreach group, and 293 (38%) of 764 in the combination group completed the vaccination series.
                Large-scale, registry-based reminder-recall interventions produced only small improvements in low immunization rates of an inner-city population. Within a clinic serving disadvantaged children, 1) to evaluate a multifaceted quality improvement (QI) project to improve immunization (IZ) up-to-date (UTD) rates and 2) to assess the efficacy of IZ reminder/recall performed following QI.
                A year-long QI project followed by a trial of reminder/recall. QI interventions were targeted at previously identified barriers to IZ and were designed specifically to improve the efficacy of reminder/recall. QI interventions were designed to 1) increase the use of medical record releases to document IZs received elsewhere; 2) improve the accuracy of parental contact information; and 3) reduce missed opportunities by utilizing chart prompts, provider education, and provider reminders. Following QI, we conducted a randomized trial of reminder/recall.
                UTD rates for 7-11 month olds increased from 21% before the QI project to 52% after (P <.0001); rates for 12-18 month olds increased from 16% before QI to 44% after (P <.0001); 19-25 month olds 18% before to 33% after (P <.001). After QI, an average of 61 records per month were updated with IZs received elsewhere. However, the accuracy of parental contact information worsened (29% unreachable before QI vs 44% after, P <.001) and missed opportunities did not improve (8% before vs 6% after, P = not significant [NS]). A subsequent trial of reminder/recall did not increase UTD rates, with 17% of recalled children brought UTD vs 16% of controls (P = NS).
                Clinic-based QI increased documented UTD rates in a disadvantaged patient population. However, IZ reminder/recall did not further increase UTD rates above the rates achieved by the QI process. Less than 20 percent of elderly and other high-risk persons targeted for annual influenza vaccination are immunized each year. In most busy practice settings, it is difficult for primary care physicians to identify every patient in need of preventive health interventions. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of microcomputer-generated reminders on influenza vaccination rates in a university-based family practice center. The practice uses an interactive encounter form system from which updated clinical information is routinely entered into a cumulative database. During a 2-month period, 686 patients were identified in the database as eligible to receive influenza vaccine according to accepted criteria. Practice physicians (n = 32) were stratified by level of training and randomized to one of three groups, thereby receiving printed reminders on the encounter forms of all, none, or half of their eligible patients. Patients of physicians who always received reminders were more likely to receive influenza vaccine during the study period than patients of the never-reminded physicians (51 percent versus 30 percent, P less than 0.001). Patients whose physicians received reminders for only half their patients had an intermediate likelihood of receiving a vaccination if a reminder was printed (38 percent) but were less likely than the patients of never-reminded physicians to receive the vaccine if no reminder was printed (20 percent, P less than 0.001). This study suggests that physicians learn to depend on reminders for preventive health activities and that reminders are most effective when they are provided at every patient encounter. Although they are effective in outpatient settings, computerized reminders have not been proved to increase preventive care in inpatient settings.
                We conducted a randomized, controlled trial to determine the effects of computerized reminders on the rates at which four preventive therapies were ordered for inpatients. During an 18-month study period, a computerized system processed on-line information for all 6371 patients admitted to a general-medicine service (for a total of 10,065 hospitalizations), generating preventive care reminders as appropriate. Physicians who were in the intervention group viewed these reminders when they were using a computerized order-entry system for inpatients.
                The reminder system identified 3416 patients (53.6 percent) as eligible for preventive measures that had not been ordered by the admitting physician. For patients with at least one indication, computerized reminders resulted in higher adjusted ordering rates for pneumococcal vaccination (35.8 percent of the patients in the intervention group vs. 0.8 percent of those in the control group, P<0.001), influenza vaccination (51.4 percent vs. 1.0 percent, P< 0.001), prophylactic heparin (32.2 percent vs. 18.9 percent, P<0.001), and prophylactic aspirin at discharge (36.4 percent vs. 27.6 percent, P<0.001).
                A majority of hospitalized patients in this study were eligible for preventive measures, and computerized reminders significantly increased the rate of delivery of such therapies. To assess the effectiveness of two serial registry reminder protocols and the interactive effects of reminders with child characteristics on immunization rates.
                At an inner city practice network in New York City we randomized 1662 children aged 6 weeks-15 months due or late for a diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTaP) to 3 groups: continuous reminders (as needed), limited reminders (up to 3) and controls, for 6 months. Reminders were triggered by the hospital registry and immunizations were tracked with both the hospital and city registries. Analyses were based on intention to treat.
                At randomization, the study groups were comparable (9.2 months of age, 77% Latino, 86% Medicaid, 49.3% up-to date). A quarter of the children were sent false reminders, 15% had incorrect contact information, and 15% had missed opportunities for vaccination. In the univariate analysis, reminders improved coverage rates, but only for the children sent continuous reminders (51.2% vs. 44.9% controls, p < .01). Multivariate analysis showed reminders had no independent effect on immunization outcomes. Age, up-to-date and Medicaid status at randomization were strong predictors of a child receiving any subsequent immunization. However, reminders interacted synergistically with Medicaid to increase the likelihood of receiving an immunization.
                At an inner city practice network, registry reminders were not effective at improving immunization outcomes due to major system barriers. Immunization registries are powerful vehicles for identifying children in need of immunizations and generating reminders but system challenges must be addressed if this promise is to be achieved in inner city practices. We designed a pilot follow-up system using two mailed reminders and evaluated it for use in the immunization clinic of a relatively large county health department in Washington State. Compliance with the recommended interval for DTP immunizations increased by 33.9% in the group of children receiving two postcard reminders compared to the control group. Over half of the respondents (52%) in the control group and 28% in the intervention group reported that transportation barriers and clinic problems prevented their return. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of an integrated patient-specific electronic clinical reminder system on diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD) care and to assess physician attitudes toward this reminder system.
                We enrolled 194 primary care physicians caring for 4549 patients with diabetes and 2199 patients with CAD at 20 ambulatory clinics. Clinics were randomized so that physicians received either evidence-based electronic reminders within their patients' electronic medical record or usual care. There were five reminders for diabetes care and four reminders for CAD care.
                The primary outcome was receipt of recommended care for diabetes and CAD. We created a summary outcome to assess the odds of increased compliance with overall diabetes care (based on five measures) and overall CAD care (based on four measures). We surveyed physicians to assess attitudes toward the reminder system.
                Baseline adherence rates to all quality measures were low. While electronic reminders increased the odds of recommended diabetes care (odds ratio [OR] 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.67) and CAD (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.01-1.55), the impact of individual reminders was variable. A total of three of nine reminders effectively increased rates of recommended care for diabetes or CAD. The majority of physicians (76%) thought that reminders improved quality of care.
                An integrated electronic reminder system resulted in variable improvement in care for diabetes and CAD. These improvements were often limited and quality gaps persist. The authors evaluated the effectiveness of computer-generated telephoned reminders used to raise the rates of on-time immunization among preschool-age children in two public clinics in Atlanta, GA. The overall effect of the intervention on immunization levels appeared to be minimal (crude relative risk = 1.07, 95 percent confidence interval = 0.78, 1.46), in part because only about 80 percent of children in both the randomly selected intervention group and in the control group were members of a household with a telephone number listed in clinic records. However, logistic regression analysis indicated that 36 of 68 children (52.9 percent) in the intervention group whose households were reached were vaccinated within 30 days of their due dates, compared to 31 of 75 children (41.3 percent) in the control group whose household telephone numbers were recorded but not called (adjusted odds ratio = 2.12, 95 percent confidence interval = 1.01, 4.46). This analysis indicates that telephoned reminders demonstrated a level of effectiveness in improving immunization levels at inner-city clinics that recommends further trial and study. Preventive care is an important role for general practitioners, yet opportunities for prevention are often missed.
                We provided an automatic electronic record preventive care reminder system for 12 preventive care activities for one 10 doctor practice. All patients who attended were randomised by the terminal digit of their record number.
                The control uptake of opportunistic prevention was low; ranging from 1.5% (tetanus immunisation) to 27% (influenza immunisation). The reminders increased this by significant but small amounts for four out of 12 activities (immunisation for tetanus and pneumococcus and recording of allergies and weight), insignificant increases for four (mumps, measles and rubella immunisation, recording of smoking, and taking of cervical smears and of blood pressure), and insignificantly decreased influenza immunisation, and screening for diabetes and hyperlipidaemia.
                Opportunistic electronic reminders have the potential to increase preventive care in general practice. Despite long-standing recommendations to provide annual influenza vaccination to children with chronic medical conditions, immunization rates are <10% in most primary care settings. Many obstacles impede implementation of these recommendations, including the challenge of identifying targeted children and the need to immunize yearly in a short time interval. The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy of billing data for identifying children who have high-risk conditions (HRCs) and need influenza vaccination and 2) to evaluate the efficacy of reminder/recall for children with HRCs.
                The study was conducted in 4 private pediatric practices in metropolitan Denver, Colorado, that share a computerized billing system and also participate in an immunization registry. For all children aged 6 to 72 months, registry records were linked with the billing database. Patients with >or=1 encounters for an HRC in the previous 24 months were selected, with HRCs identified from International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnostic codes. Using medical records as the "gold standard," we reviewed 327 randomly selected records to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of billing data for identifying HRCs. For children with an HRC, we then conducted a randomized, controlled trial of reminder/recall for influenza vaccination. The primary outcome of the recall trial was receipt of influenza vaccine.
                Billing data had a sensitivity of 72% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 48%-95%), specificity of 95% (95% CI: 90%-100%), and overall accuracy of 90% (95% CI: 84%-96%) in determining which children had an HRC. Of the 17,273 patients aged 6 to 72 months, 2007 had >or=1 HRCs (12% overall; range: 9%-14% per practice). Asthma/reactive airways disease accounted for 87% of all HRCs. Reminder/recall significantly increased influenza immunization in children with HRCs, with a vaccination rate of 42% in those recalled, compared with 25% in control subjects. Recalled subjects were more likely to have an office visit (68% vs 60%) and less likely to have a missed opportunity to immunize (28% vs 37%) compared with control subjects.
                Diagnosis-based billing data accurately identified children who had HRCs and needed annual influenza vaccination, and registry-driven reminder/recall significantly increased influenza immunization in targeted children. The Ohio Department of Health initiated a program of mailing an immunization reminder to the mothers of six-month-old children predicted to be at high risk of failure to receive vaccinations based on birth certificate information. The evaluation results indicated a 50% gain in immunizations amongst children whose parents received the letter when compared with those not receiving the letter. To compare the effectiveness of three computerized reminder systems in the delivery of five preventive procedures in family practice.
                Prospective, randomized, controlled study.
                Ottawa Civic Hospital Family Medicine Centre.
                Of 8502 patients 15 years of age or more who were not in a hospital or institution 5883 were randomly assigned, by family, to a control group, a physician reminder group (passive) or a telephone or letter reminder group (active). The remaining 2619 patients were not included in the randomized portion of the study but were monitored.
                During 1 year the patients in the active reminder groups received a telephone call or letter reminding them of any overdue preventive procedures; for those in the passive reminder group the physician was reminded at an office visit to provide any overdue service.
                Rates of completion of the preventive procedures required.
                All three reminder systems significantly improved the delivery of preventive services (p less than 0.001). The procedure completion rates were 42.0% in the letter reminder group, 42.0% in the telephone reminder group, 33.7% in the physician reminder group and 14.1% in the randomized control group. The use of a letter was more cost-effective than the telephone system, but the physician reminder system was the most cost-effective.
                Computerized reminder systems do improve the delivery of preventive services in family practice. Despite an emerging consensus on appropriate preventive services, a minority of patients receive them. A study was undertaken to assess the impact of computer-generated reminders to adult patients, their physicians, or both patients and physicians on adherence to five recommended preventive services: cholesterol measurements, fecal occult blood testing, mammography, Papanicolaou smears, and tetanus immunization. During the academic year 1988-1989, all 7397 adult patients and their 49 physicians in a university family medicine clinical practice were randomized by practice group into one of four study groups: control, physician reminders, patient reminders, and both physician and patient reminders. Adherence was defined in community-oriented terms: the percentage of patients within each group who had received the preventive service in the recommended interval. During the study period, adherence to four of the five preventive services increased significantly, with the largest increases in the physician and patient reminder group: cholesterol measurements increased from 19.5% to 38.1%, fecal occult blood testing 9.3% to 27.0%, mammography 11.4% to 27.1%, and tetanus immunization 23.4% to 35.4% (for each increase, P less than .0001, McNemar's chi-square test). In general, increases were greater in blacks and in patients with any form of insurance coverage. Computer-based physician and patient reminder systems have great promise of improving adherence to preventive services in primary care settings. Computerized reminder systems have been shown to be effective in improving physician compliance with preventive services guidelines. Very little has been published about the use of computerized reminders for preventive care in diabetes. We implemented a computer-generated reminder system for diabetes care guidelines in a randomized controlled study in the outpatient clinics of 35 internal medicine residents at the University of Utah and Salt Lake Veterans Affairs Hospitals. After a six month study period, compliance with the recommended care significantly improved in both the intervention group that received patient-specific reminders about the guidelines (38.0% at baseline, 54.9% at follow-up) and the control group that received a nonspecific report (34.6% at baseline, 51.0% at follow-up). There was no significant difference between the two groups. Both clinic sites showed similar improvement over baseline levels of compliance. Residents who completed encounter forms used by the system showed a significantly greater improvement in compliance than those who did not complete encounter forms (19.7% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.006). The improvements in guideline compliance were seen in all areas of diabetes preventive care studied, and significant improvements were seen with recommended items from the medical history, physical exam, laboratory testing, referrals, and patient education. The use of encounter forms by the providers significantly improved documented compliance with the guidelines in almost all categories of preventive care. These results suggest that computerized reminder systems improve compliance with recommended care more by facilitating the documentation of clinical findings and the ordering of recommended procedures than by providing the clinician with patient-specific information about guideline compliance status. Further study is needed to understand the implications of these findings to the development of future computerized reminder systems for chronic diseases such as diabetes. Randomized trials were performed in Denmark and The Netherlands to determine the effect of mailed reminders on the response rate in surveys among patients in general practice. In both countries, general practitioners handed out questionnaires to 200 adult patients who came to visit them. An intervention group of 100 patients received reminders at 3 weeks after the visit, whereas a control group of the remaining 100 patients did not receive reminders. The response rate was significantly higher in the intervention groups than in the control group in The Netherlands (86% versus 55%, respectively) but not in Denmark (87% versus 81%, respectively). Mailed reminders can improve the response rate in surveys related to a general practice, but they are not effective in all situations. To assess the effectiveness of computer-generated telephone reminder and recall messages in increasing preschool immunization visits.
                Randomized, controlled trial.
                Fourteen counties in urban and rural Georgia.
                Children (N = 8002) who were younger than 2 years; had telephone numbers listed in preexisting computerized immunization databases; and were due or late for immunization(s) during the 4-month enrollment period.
                Households of children were randomized to receive or not receive a general or vaccine-specific computer-generated telephone reminder or recall message the day before the child was due, or immediately after randomization if the child was late.
                The rates of immunization visits during the 30-day follow-up period.
                Of the 4636 children whose households were randomized to receive a message, 1684 (36.3%) visited the health department within 30 days compared with 955 (28.4%) of the 3366 children whose households were not contacted (risk ratio [RR] = 1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.20 to 1.37; P < .01). Immunization visits were more frequent (41.1%) among the 3257 children whose households actually received the message (RR = 1.45; 95% CI = 1.36 to 1.56; P < .01). Improvement in immunization visits was similar for general and specific messages, greater for recall than reminder messages, and greatest for children who were late for the third dose of the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine and the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine.
                These data suggest a simple and effective way to increase preschool immunization visits, particularly for vaccines associated with the lowest immunization rates. This study evaluated the effectiveness of an annual public health intervention in a managed care setting.
                Managed care organization members 65 years and older who received influenza immunization in 1996 were randomized to an intervention group (mailed a postcard reminder to receive an influenza vaccination in 1997) or a control group (no postcard). Vaccination rates for both groups were assessed monthly.
                Members receiving the intervention were no more likely to be immunized (78.6%) than members of the control group (77.2%, P = .222). Members were vaccinated at the same pace regardless of vaccination history and postcard intervention status.
                Postcard reminders were not an effective intervention among seniors who had been vaccinated the previous year. Non-attendance is common in primary care and previous studies have reported that reminders were useful in reducing broken appointments.
                To determine the effectiveness of a text messaging reminder in improving attendance in primary care.
                Multicentre three-arm randomized controlled trial.
                Seven primary care clinics in Malaysia. Participants. Patients (or their caregivers) who required follow-up at the clinics between 48 hours and 3 months from the recruitment date. Interventions. Two intervention arms consisted of text messaging and mobile phone reminders 24-48 hours prior to scheduled appointments. Control group did not receive any intervention. Outcome measures. Attendance rates and costs of interventions.
                A total of 993 participants were eligible for analysis. Attendance rates of control, text messaging and mobile phone reminder groups were 48.1, 59.0 and 59.6%, respectively. The attendance rate of the text messaging reminder group was significantly higher compared with that of the control group (odds ratio 1.59, 95% confidence interval 1.17 to 2.17, P = 0.005). There was no statistically significant difference in attendance rates between text messaging and mobile phone reminder groups. The cost of text messaging reminder (RM 0.45 per attendance) was lower than mobile phone reminder (RM 0.82 per attendance).
                Text messaging reminder system was effective in improving attendance rate in primary care. It was more cost-effective compared with the mobile phone reminder. Despite recommendations supporting annual influenza vaccination for people aged 65 years or older, vaccination rates remain low. Several studies have evaluated the effect of sending mailed reminders, but few have compared alternative ways of reminding patients to receive the vaccine. In a randomized trial of 939 patients aged 65 years or older in four family practices carried out between Oct. 23 and Dec. 31, 1984, we compared three ways of reminding elderly patients to receive the vaccine: personal reminder by the physician, telephone reminder by the nurse and reminder by letter. The vaccination rates for the three groups were 22.9%, 37% and 35.1% respectively. No reminder was issued to a control group, and the rate was 9.8%. Some patients could not be reached by telephone, and some did not see the physician during the specified time. Among the patients whom the nurse actually contacted, the vaccination rate was 43.5%; the rate for patients whom the doctor actually saw was 45.1%. Overall, a telephone reminder by the nurse was the most effective method, and at an hourly salary of $16 or less this method would also be the most cost-effective. The reminders used in this study were automatically generated from a computerized medical record system. The study shows how a computerized system can be used to identify patients for whom preventive procedures are due. To improve the delivery of preventive care in a medical clinic, a controlled trial was conducted of two interventions that were expected to influence delivery of preventive services differently, depending on level of initiative required of the physician or patient to complete a service.
                A prospective, controlled trial of five-months' duration.
                A university hospital-based, general medical clinic.
                Thirty-nine junior and senior medical residents who saw patients in stable clinic teams throughout the study.
                A computerized reminder system for physicians and a patient questionnaire and educational hand-out on preventive care.
                Delivery of five of six audited preventive services improved significantly after the interventions were introduced. The computerized reminder alone increased completion rates of services that relied primarily on physician initiative; the questionnaire alone increased completion rate of the service that depended more on patient compliance as well as on some physician-dependent services. Both interventions used together were slightly less effective in improving performance of physician-dependent services than the computerized reminder used alone.
                These interventions can improve the delivery of preventive care but they differ in their impacts on physician and patient behaviors. Overall, the computer reminder was the more effective intervention. To assess the effect of three computerized reminder systems on compliance with tetanus vaccination.
                Prospective randomized controlled trial.
                Ottawa Civic Hospital Family Medicine Centre.
                Of 8069 patients 20 years of age or more who were not in a hospital or institution 5589 were randomly assigned, by family, to a control group, a physician reminder group, a telephone reminder group or a letter reminder group. The remaining 2480 patients were not included in the randomized portion of the study but were monitored. Results are presented for the 5242 randomized patients and the 2369 nonrandomized patients for whom there was no up-to-date record of tetanus vaccination at the start of the trial.
                For the patients in the physician reminder group the physician was reminded at an office visit to assess the patient's tetanus vaccination status and to recommend vaccination; those in the other two reminder groups received a telephone call or letter enquiring about their tetanus vaccination status and recommending a booster dose.
                Proportion of patients who received tetanus toxoid during the study year or who had a claim of vaccination in the previous 10 years.
                The rate of recorded tetanus vaccination in the randomized control group was 3.2%. The difference between that rate and those for the three reminder groups was 19.6% in the physician reminder group (95% confidence interval [CI] 17.1% to 22.2%, p less than 0.00001), 20.8% in the telephone reminder group (95% CI 18.3% to 23.5%, p less than 0.00001) and 27.4% in the letter reminder group (95% CI 24.8% to 30.2%, p less than 0.00001)). The letter reminders were more effective than either the telephone reminders (p = 0.00013) or the physician reminders (p less than 0.00001) in improving compliance. The cost to the practice per additional vaccination recorded was 43 for the physician reminders, $5.43 for the telephone reminders and $6.05 for the letter reminders.
                Although all three reminder systems increased the rate of recorded tetanus vaccination they fell far short of achieving complete population coverage. More intensive interventions would be required to approach that goal. However, such interventions do not appear to be justified given the rarity of tetanus. A randomized, single-blind, controlled trial was performed at a community health center to measure the impact of computer-generated reminders mailed to patients on the rate of influenza immunization. High-risk patients were randomized to one of three groups: 1) usual care, 2) one reminder letter, offering free influenza immunization without an appointment, or 3) two sequential reminder letters, offering the same. The reminders did not significantly affect rates of influenza immunization. Analysis of the combined groups indicates that an appointment with a primary care provider remains the most reliable method of immunizing high-risk patients at this health center. Laboratory services play an important part in screening, diagnosis, and management of patients within primary care. However, unnecessary use of laboratory tests is increasing. Our aim was to assess the effect of two interventions on the number of laboratory tests requested by primary-care physicians.
                We did a cluster randomised controlled trial using a 2x2 factorial design, involving 85 primary-care practices (370 family practitioners) that request all laboratory tests from one regional centre. The interventions were quarterly feedback of practice requesting rates for nine laboratory tests, enhanced with educational messages, and brief educational reminder messages added to the test result reports for nine laboratory tests. The primary outcome was the number of targeted tests requested by primary-care practices during the 12 months of the intervention. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN06490422.
                Practices that received either or both the enhanced feedback and the reminder messages were significantly less likely than the control group to request the targeted tests in total (enhanced feedback odds ratio 0.87, 95% CI 0.81-0.94; reminder messages 0.89, 0.83-0.93). The effect of the interventions varied across the targeted tests individually, although the number of tests requested for both interventions was generally reduced. Neither intervention was consistently better than the other.
                Enhanced feedback of requesting rates and brief educational reminder messages, alone and in combination, are effective strategies for reducing test requesting in primary care. Both strategies are feasible within most laboratory settings. To study the effect of a computerized medical record and other practice factors on the delivery of preventive health care.
                Prospective, controlled trial.
                University general internal medicine teaching clinic.
                Forty-five internal medicine residents and their 4 supervising attending physicians.
                The study group used a computerized ambulatory medical record system that included health care maintenance reminders. The control group used a conventional paper record with a health care maintenance flow sheet.
                The computer reminders significantly increased health care maintenance recommendations made to patients for proctosigmoidoscopy, tetanus vaccination, influenza vaccination, and pneumococcal vaccination, but not for fecal occult blood testing, mammography, Pap smears, or serum thyroxine screening in the elderly. First-year residents were nearly twice as successful as third-year residents in overall health care maintenance. Success scores varied markedly depending on which attending physician was supervising the residents. We found a strong interaction among group assignment, supervising attending, and level of training such that the reminders doubled success scores among first-year residents supervised by two of the attending physicians but had little effect on other subgroups. The time of year and the format of the reminder also had important effects for some of the maneuvers.
                Although computerized medical records markedly improved the performance of prevention maneuvers by committed physicians, many physicians using computer systems failed to make use of the resource. The reasons for this were complex. Future work in this area should carefully control for personal behaviors and focus upon administrative changes that more effectively implement these potentially powerful tools. In New Zealand, more than 5% of people aged 50 years and older have undiagnosed diabetes; most of them attend family practitioners (FPs) at least once a year.
                To test the effectiveness of patients or computers as reminders to screen for diabetes in patients attending FPs.
                A randomized-controlled trial compared screening rates in 4 intervention arms: patient reminders, computer reminders, both reminders, and usual care. The trial lasted 2 months. The patient reminder was a diabetes risk self-assessment sheet filled in by patients and given to the FP during the consultation. The computer reminder was an icon that flashed only for patients considered eligible for screening.
                One hundred and seven FPs.
                The primary outcome was whether each eligible patient, who attended during the trial, was or was not tested for blood glucose. Analysis was by intention to treat and allowed for clustering by FP.
                Patient reminders (odds ratio [OR] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21, 2.43), computer reminders (OR 2.55, 1.68, 3.88), and both reminders (OR 1.69, 1.11, 2.59) were all effective compared with usual care. Computer reminders were more effective than patient reminders (OR 1.49, 1.07, 2.07). Patients were more likely to be screened if they visited the FP repeatedly, if patients were non-European, if they were "regular" patients of the practice, and if their FP had a higher screening rate prior to the study.
                Patient and computer reminders were effective methods to increase screening for diabetes. However, the effects were not additive. We developed a computer-stored medical record system containing a limited set of the total clinical data base--primarily diagnostic studies and treatments. This system responds to its own content according to physician-authored reminder rules. To determine the effect of the reminder messages generated by 1490 rules on physician behavior, we randomly assigned practitioners in a general medicine clinic to study or control groups. The computer found indications for six different actions per patient in 12 467 patients during a 2-year study: 61 study group residents who received computer reminders responded to 49% of these indications; 54 control group residents, to only 29% (p less than 0.0001). Preventive care (occult blood testing, mammographic screening, weight reduction diets, influenza and pneumococcal vaccines) was affected. The intentions of the study group to use a given action for an indication predicted their response to the indications (p less than 0.03, r2 = 0.33). The intentions of the control residents did not. To evaluate the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of computer-generated recall letters to parents of children overdue for immunizations.
                This randomized controlled trial included children of two facilities in a regional health maintenance organization. Parents of 20-month-olds who had not yet received a measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) immunization were identified via a computerized immunization tracking system. One half were mailed personalized letters that included the recommended immunization schedule and a request to call for an appointment; the other half served as a control group. Receipt of the MMR between 20 and 24 months of age was evaluated with the computerized tracking system. A telephone survey was conducted with parents whose children had not received the MMR by 24 months. Decision analysis was used to project the theoretical outcomes and costs of a recall letter policy for other populations.
                Among 20-month-old children 10% had not received the MMR; 289 families were included in the analysis. Of families who were mailed letters, 54% (82 of 153) received the MMR by 24 months of age, compared with 35% (47 of 136) of those in the control group (P = 0.001). The telephone survey was completed with 110 parents of children who still did not appear on the health plan computer as having received the MMR by 24 months. Fifteen percent said the child had received an immunization at an outside provider, and of the rest 62% said they had not been aware that an immunization was due. In the cost effectiveness analysis it was projected that recall letters would increase the immunization rate for the regional population of approximately 30000 children from 86% to 90% at a total cost of $5031 annually. The cost per additional child appropriately immunized was $4.04. In sensitivity analyses this cost effectiveness ratio varied depending on the baseline population coverage rate as well as the estimated effectiveness of recall letters.
                Computer-generated letters to recall children overdue for immunizations resulted in a higher proportion of children appropriately immunized in this setting. However, the strategy was not as cost-effective as intuition might suggest. Further studies in health maintenance organization (HMO) settings should compare the cost effectiveness of letters with other low cost strategies including automated telephone reminders. In an academic general medicine clinic, we performed a randomized, controlled trial to compare (1) the effects of supplying monthly feedback reports of compliance with preventive care protocols by 135 internal medicine house staff with (2) the effects of specific reminders given to them at the time of patient visits. The protocols were randomly divided into two groups, A and B, and half the house staff were given feedback for Group A and half for Group B. Thus, each group served as a control for the other. Each feedback group was also randomly assigned to receive reminders for either Group A or B protocols. House staff receiving feedback more often complied with fecal occult blood testing, mammography, pneumococcal vaccination, use of metronidazole, and combined Group A and B protocols than did controls (P less than 0.01). There was also significantly more compliance with the same protocols by house staff receiving reminders, but the increase for fecal occult blood testing, pneumococcal vaccination, and combined Group A protocols was twice that seen in physicians given feedback alone. In addition, reminders alone increased compliance with oral calcium supplementation. Overall compliance with the preventive care protocols was low: 10-15% in physicians receiving neither feedback nor reminders, increasing to 15-30% in those receiving reminders. Physician compliance with suggested preventive care protocols can be increased by both delayed feedback and immediate reminders, but reminders have a greater effect. There is limited evidence on whether growing mobile phone availability in sub-Saharan Africa can be used to promote high adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART). This study tested the efficacy of short message service (SMS) reminders on adherence to ART among patients attending a rural clinic in Kenya.
                A randomized controlled trial of four SMS reminder interventions with 48 weeks of follow-up.
                Four hundred and thirty-one adult patients who had initiated ART within 3 months were enrolled and randomly assigned to a control group or one of the four intervention groups. Participants in the intervention groups received SMS reminders that were either short or long and sent at a daily or weekly frequency. Adherence was measured using the medication event monitoring system. The primary outcome was whether adherence exceeded 90% during each 12-week period of analysis and the 48-week study period. The secondary outcome was whether there were treatment interruptions lasting at least 48 h.
                In intention-to-treat analysis, 53% of participants receiving weekly SMS reminders achieved adherence of at least 90% during the 48 weeks of the study, compared with 40% of participants in the control group (P = 0.03). Participants in groups receiving weekly reminders were also significantly less likely to experience treatment interruptions exceeding 48 h during the 48-week follow-up period than participants in the control group (81 vs. 90%, P = 0.03).
                These results suggest that SMS reminders may be an important tool to achieve optimal treatment response in resource-limited settings. We developed a comprehensive individualized preventive care reminder system and then tested the hypothesis that directly involving patients in the reminder process would lead to greater use of preventive services than involving physicians only. There were three experimental groups of 350 patients each: in group 1 physicians and patients received the reminder; in group 2 physicians only received the reminder; in group 3 neither physicians nor patients received the reminder. Nine preventive care services were studied: blood pressure measurement; dental exam; ocular pressure measurement; stool exam for occult blood; influenza, pneumococcal, and tetanus vaccinations; mammography; and Papanicolaou smears. Need for these services was determined by telephone interview and chart review. To determine whether services were obtained, charts were reviewed after four to eight months of follow-up. For overall compliance with preventive recommendations and for several individual services (stool exam for occult blood, tetanus vaccination, mammography), group 1 patients received significantly more preventive care than group 2. Likewise, group 2 patients received more preventive care than group 3. These data show that involving patients in reminder efforts is an effective means of raising the level of preventive services. A computerized medical record system was designed to detect and remind the responsible clinician about clinical events that might need corrective action. These reminders significantly increased the clinician response rate (in terms of test orders and treatment changes) to the events in question. The addition of relevant medical literature citations to the reminders did not significantly change the clinician response rate as compared with that with reminders alone, nor did it stimulate the physicians to read any of the cited articles kept in an immediately available "library" of reprints. To investigate the effect on immunization levels of retrospective written feedback to residents regarding missed immunization opportunities.
                Randomized trial with control group.
                Pediatric resident continuity clinic in an urban hospital-based primary care clinic.
                Thirty-two postgraduate level 2 and postgraduate level 3 pediatric residents.
                Monthly retrospective written feedback mailed to residents detailing their missed immunization opportunities and appointment failure rates over a 12-month period beginning in February 1997.
                The immunization level of 2-year-old children in the resident clinic was the main outcome of interest. Secondary outcomes included missed immunization opportunity rates and appointment failure rates.
                Postintervention immunization levels were 71.4% (95% confidence limits [CLs]: 63.2%, 78.7%) for patients from the intervention group and 68.5% (95% CLs: 60.8%, 75.4%) for patients from the control group. The immunization level for patients of both groups who had fewer than 2 visits during the second year of life was 47.2% (95% CLs: 38.2%, 56.3%). This compares with an immunization level of 78.1% (95% CLs: 66.0%, 87.5%) for patients from both groups who had 2 visits during the second year of life, and with an immunization level of 88.2% (95% CLs: 81.0%, 93.4%) for patients of both groups who had more than 2 visits during the second year of life (P<.001).
                In this setting, written retrospective feedback to residents was an ineffective strategy for improving immunization levels. Adequate follow-up during the second year of life is critical in achieving high immunization levels. This study assessed the impact of automated telephone reminders on tuberculin skin test returns.
                A total of 701 English-speaking and Spanish-speaking patients of a public health immunization program were randomly assigned to an intervention or a control group. Those in the intervention group received an automated telephone reminder to return for the reading of their skin test.
                Automated telephone reminders significantly reduced return failures 53% (from 14% to 7%) when the scheduled interval between test administration and reading was three days, but had no impact for a two-day interval. Effectiveness of reminders did not differ significantly by patient age, gender, or language (English versus Spanish).
                Results suggest the value of automated reminder calls for intra-appointment intervals as short as three days. During the 1984-1985 influenza season two study groups were used to compare telephone and letter reminder methods with a control group that received no reminder to determine which was the most effective strategy to increase influenza vaccination rates among the high-risk patient population of a university-based family practice. Seven hundred eighty-seven high-risk patients were randomly assigned to one of the three study groups: a mailed-reminder group, a telephone-reminder group, and a control group. Vaccination rates for both reminder methods were significantly higher than for the control group (P less than .02), and if successfully contacted, the telephone-reminder group had a significantly better vaccination rate than the mailed-reminder group (P less than .05). If successful telephone contact can be made, this reminder method is more effective than a letter reminder to increase influenza vaccination rates among high-risk patients. To determine if postcard and telephone reminders increased the rate of influenza immunization of Medicare beneficiaries.
                Before and after trial (postcard reminders) with systematically allocated control group (telephone reminder intervention).
                A semirural family practice residency program.
                All 475 noninstitutionalized persons older than 65 years who had received at least 1 office service in the previous 2 years.
                In September 1996, each of 475 patients received a postcard urging prompt influenza immunization. Those not responding within 1 month were systematically allocated either to a group receiving further telephone contact or to a control group. At the time of telephone contact, any offered information about influenza immunization received outside the Smoky Hill Family Practice Center, Salina, Kan, was recorded.
                We measured the percentage of change in practice-administered influenza immunizations compared with the baseline rate of the preceding 2 years; the difference in immunization rates between the telephone intervention group and controls; and the number of patients contacted by telephone who reported receiving influenza immunization at a site other than the Family Practice Center.
                Twenty-eight percent of patients who received a postcard obtained office influenza immunizations within 1 month, but no additional immunizations could be attributed to the telephone intervention. Thirty-five percent of patients contacted by telephone reported receiving influenza immunization at a site other than the Family Practice Center.
                The postcard intervention was associated with a significant increase in the office immunization rate. This increase may have been confounded by "site shift" in which individuals came to the office for an immunization that they might otherwise have received at other community sites. To compare the effects of different types of computer-generated, mailed reminders on the rate of influenza immunization and to analyze the relative cost-effectiveness of the reminders.
                Randomized controlled trial.
                Multispecialty group practice.
                We studied 24,743 high-risk adult patients aligned with a primary care physician.
                Patients were randomized to one of four interventions: (1) no reminder, which served as control; (2) a generic postcard; (3) a personalized postcard from their physician; and (4) a personalized letter from their physician, tailored to their health risk.
                The immunization rate was measured using billing data. A telephone survey was conducted in a subgroup of patients to measure reactions to the mailed reminders. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness, a model was constructed that integrated the observed effect of the interventions with published data on the effect of immunization on future inpatient health care costs.
                All three of the reminders studied increased the influenza vaccination rate when compared with the control group. The vaccination rate was 40.6% in the control group, 43.5% in the generic postcard group, 44.7% in the personalized postcard group, and 45.2% in the tailored letter group. The rates of immunization increased as the intensity of the intervention increased (p < .0001). Seventy-eight percent of patients in the letter group deemed the intervention useful, and 86% reported that they would like to get reminders in the future. The cost-effectiveness analysis estimated that in a nonepidemic year, the net savings per 100 reminders sent would be $659 for the personalized postcard intervention and $735 for the tailored letter intervention. When these net cost-savings rates were each applied to the entire high-risk cohort of 24,743 patients, the estimated total net savings was $162,940 for the postcard and $181,858 for the tailored letter.
                Although the absolute increase in immunization rates with the use of reminders appeared small, the increases translated into substantial cost savings when applied to a large high-risk population. Personalized reminders were somewhat more effective in increasing immunization, and personalized letters tailored to the patients' condition were deemed useful and important by the individuals who received them and had a beneficial indirect effect on patient satisfaction. This study assessed the impact of automated telephone reminders in a population of 2,008 patients scheduled for appointments in a public health tuberculosis clinic. Overall, remainders increased appointment attendance from 52% to 62%. Reminders were more effective for some applications than others, but the effectiveness of reminders did not differ significantly across patient age, sex, or ethnicity. Counter to theoretical predictions, neither attribution of the reminder message to an authority nor a statement stressing the importance of the appointment significantly increased the effectiveness of the reminder above the level obtained without these enhancements. Despite its effectiveness as a method of controlling cervical carcinoma, the use of Pap smear testing remains incomplete, and its promotion in the primary care setting provides an important opportunity for intervention.
                The authors conducted a randomized controlled trial that involved three sites of a health maintenance organization (HMO) serving an urban minority population. Their aim was to evaluate the impact of reminders given to patients and physicians on site visitation by patients and Pap smear use. Eligible women (n=5801) were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 intervention combinations (in which reminders were given to either the patient or the physician, to both, or to neither). If they were ineligible for patient reminder intervention, patients were randomized only to physician reminder intervention (the presence or absence of it). The letter of reminder mailed to the patient invited women due for Pap smears to visit the HMO site, and the reminder for physicians was a medical record notice that a Pap smear was due. Logistic and survival analyses were used to investigate the correlation of intervention status with visitation, interval of time to a visit, and Pap smear use.
                In the primary intent-to-treat analysis, there was no significant effect of either patient or physician reminder interventions on rates of visitation or Pap smear completion. The secondary efficacy analyses demonstrated no overall effect of either patient or physician reminders, but effects among subgroups of women at individual HMO sites were noted. At Site 3, there was an apparent increase in time to the next visit among the subgroup of women with a chronic illness (16 weeks with intervention vs. 9 weeks without). With the physician reminder, the odds that a Pap smear would be given during the study year were increased among women without a previous Pap smear at Site 1 (adjusted odds ratio=1.39) and those with a chronic illness at Site 2 (adjusted odds ratio=3.38).
                Reminders given to patients and physicians had a limited impact on visitation by patients to the HMO sites or Pap smear completion. Although some subgroups of women may benefit, the authors also observed a possibly unfavorable impact among other subgroups. These results emphasize the importance of identifying more effective interventions, targeting them to women most likely to benefit, and not overlooking the possibility that preventive intervention will have an unanticipated adverse effect. Hospitalisation represents an opportunity to identify unimmunised people at risk for the complications of influenza and pneumococcal disease. We conducted a randomised controlled trial of two strategies to increase uptake of influenza and pneumococcal vaccines in eligible, hospitalised subjects aged 65 years or more, admitted between May and September 1998 to a Melbourne hospital. Unvaccinated participants were allocated randomly to alert systems for hospital staff or community general practitioners (GPs). Follow-up occurred at 1 and 3 months. The baseline vaccination rates were 70% for influenza (426/606) and 41% (248/606) for pneumococcal disease. For unvaccinated subjects, the hospital alert resulted in 67% uptake compared to 55% following a GP alert for pneumococcal vaccine; and 63% in hospital compared to 53% following a GP alert for influenza vaccine. Although there was a trend toward a higher uptake in hospital, neither of these differences was statistically significant. The majority (75%) of vaccinations following a GP alert occurred within 1 month of discharge. Despite hospital and community-based reminder systems, there are still significant missed opportunities for vaccination. We did not demonstrate significant differences between hospital and GP reminder systems, but there was a trend towards higher uptake with opportunistic vaccination in hospital.
                Copyright 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel nan This prospective cohort study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of mail and telephone contact with parents as a means to improve the immunization coverage of children less than 7 years old in a family practice residency clinic.
                Immunization records for 519 children enrolled in an outpatient clinic were reviewed and updated. Children whose immunizations were current (55) were excluded, which left 464 children whose immunizations were more than 1 month behind for their age groups. A random sample of one-half of these children (231) were mailed a postcard listing the immunizations that they required to be up to date. The mailing was followed up with telephone contact, when necessary, to prompt compliance. The other one-half of the children were not contacted and served as the control group. Immunizations provided to the two groups were compared 6 months after the initial mailing.
                Before the initiation of the study, only 10.6 percent of the infants and children in the practice had their immunizations completed or were up to date. There were 124 immunizations given to 49 children in the intervention group compared with 84 immunizations to 33 children in the control (P < 0.047). Thirty-four children were brought up to date in the control group compared with 17 in the intervention cohort (P < 0.011).
                Direct mail reminders and telephone contact with parents of children who were behind in their immunizations were effective methods to encourage compliance. The increased number of immunizations received by the children in the intervention group was overshadowed by the poor coverage of the entire practice, a highly mobile and predominantly indigent group. Additional interventions are urgently needed to improve immunization levels in infants and children. The objective of this study was to determine whether patient-specific letters, which describe the content of an upcoming well-child appointment, improve the show rate of well-child appointments better than postcard reminders. In this prospective clinical trial conducted at a pediatric continuity clinic in a teaching hospital, 288 newborns were randomized to a letter, postcard, or control group. For every well-child appointment, families were sent either a letter pertaining to the particular well-child appointment or a postcard; the control group received no reminders. There were no differences in demographics among the groups. The show rates between the letter and postcard groups were not different, but were significantly higher than the show rate for the control group (75.0%, 73.7%, and 67.5%, respectively; P < .05). A cost comparison between the use of postcards versus not using postcards revealed a benefit in the former. We concluded postcard reminders are effective in improving show rates for well-child-care visits, and that patient-specific letters have no additional benefit above that of postcard reminders. Sexually transmitted disease clinics can deliver hepatitis vaccines to men who have sex with men, but have been reluctant to do so because of perceived low vaccination completion rates.
                The goal was to evaluate hepatitis A and B vaccination eligibility, acceptance, and completion and the effectiveness of reminder/recall in a sexually transmitted disease clinic serving men who have sex with men.
                Clients self-reported their eligibility for free vaccine. Consenting clients who accepted a first dose of vaccine were systematically assigned to receive telephone reminder/recall or standard follow-up.
                Of 1203 clients, 71.8% were eligible for both vaccines; 62.6% of those eligible accepted both. Reminder/recall was associated with increased receipt of the second dose of hepatitis B vaccine (86.7% versus 80.4% among intervention and control groups, respectively), but not with completion of both vaccine series (55.9% versus 58.8%).
                The majority of clients were eligible for both hepatitis vaccines, and most eligible clients accepted a first dose of both vaccines. Reminder/recall, as delivered at this clinic, failed to increase the proportion of clients who received all vaccine doses. New delivery mechanisms should be explored. Although cervical cancer is one of the potentially most preventable malignancies, it is still fairly common. In settings with established screening programs, increased compliance is important for future reduction in cervical cancer incidence, but it is presently unclear how this can be effectively achieved.
                We conducted a randomized controlled trial including all 12,240 women invited to organized screening in Sweden. To increase compliance, three successive interventions were tested: (a) modified invitation versus the standard invitation letter, (b) reminder letter to nonattenders after the first intervention versus no reminder letter, and (c) phone reminder to nonattenders after the reminder letter versus no phone reminder. We analyzed the proportion of women attending screening after each intervention and the cumulative proportion after the interventions as well as the cumulative proportions of cytologic abnormalities.
                The modified invitation did not increase attendance compared with the standard invitation letter [difference 1.3% 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.3 to 2.9]. In contrast, a reminder letter increased the proportion of women attending with 9.2% (95% CI 7.9-10.5) compared with women who did not receive a reminder letter, and a phone reminder increased the proportion of women attending with 31.4% (95% CI 26.9-35.9). Combinations of modified invitation, written reminder, and phone reminder almost doubled attendance within 12 months, and the number of detected cytologic abnormalities was more than tripled.
                Simple reminders by mail and phone can drastically increase women's participation in Papanicolaou smear screening and increase the number of detected precursor lesions and thereby save lives.
Patient reminder and recall systems in primary care settings are effective in improving immunization rates in developed countries.