Dataset Information

Can uptake of childhood influenza immunisation through schools and GP practices be increased through behaviourally-informed invitation letters and reminders: two pragmatic randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The UK is rolling out a national childhood influenza immunisation programme for children, delivered through primary care and schools. Behaviourally-informed letters and reminders have been successful at increasing uptake of other public health interventions. Therefore, we investigated the effects of a behaviourally-informed letter on uptake of the vaccine at GP practices, and of a letter and a reminder (SMS/ email) on uptake at schools.

Methods and results

Study 1 was a cluster-randomised parallel trial of 21,786 two- and three-year olds in 250 GP practices, conducted during flu season (September to January inclusive) 2016/7. The intervention was a centrally-sent behaviourally-informed invitation letter, control was usual care. The proportion of two- and three-year olds in each practice who received a vaccination by 31st January 2017 was 23.4% in the control group compared to 37.1% in the intervention group (OR = 1.93; 95% CI = 1.82, 2.05, p < 0.001). Study 2 was a 2 (behavioural letter vs standard letter) × 2 (reminder vs no reminder) factorial trial of 1108 primary schools which included 3010 school years 1-3. Letters were sent to parents from providers, and reminders sent to parents from the schools. In the standard-letter-no-reminder arm, an average of 61.6% of eligible children in each school year were vaccinated, compared to 61.9% in the behavioural-letter-no-reminder arm, 63.5% in the standard-letter-plus-reminder arm, and 62.9% in the behavioural-letter-plus reminder condition, F(3, 2990) = 2.68, p = 0.046. In a multi-level model, with demographic variables as fixed effects, the proportion of eligible students in the school year who were vaccinated increased with the reminder, β = 0.086 (0.041), p < 0.036, but there was no effect of the letter nor any interaction effect.

Conclusion

Sending a behaviourally informed invitation letter can increase uptake of childhood influenza vaccines at the GP surgery compared to usual practice. A reminder SMS or email can increase uptake of the influenza vaccine in schools, but the effect size was minimal.

Trial registration

Study 1: Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02921633. Study 2: Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02883972.

SUBMITTER: Howell-Jones R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9854224 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Can uptake of childhood influenza immunisation through schools and GP practices be increased through behaviourally-informed invitation letters and reminders: two pragmatic randomized controlled trials.

Howell-Jones Rebecca R Gold Natalie N Bowen Sarah S Bunten Amanda A Tan Karen K Saei Ayoub A Jones Sarah S MacDonald Pauline P Watson Robin R Bennett Kirsty F KF Chadborn Tim T

BMC public health 20230120 1

<h4>Background</h4>The UK is rolling out a national childhood influenza immunisation programme for children, delivered through primary care and schools. Behaviourally-informed letters and reminders have been successful at increasing uptake of other public health interventions. Therefore, we investigated the effects of a behaviourally-informed letter on uptake of the vaccine at GP practices, and of a letter and a reminder (SMS/ email) on uptake at schools.<h4>Methods and results</h4>Study 1 was a ...[more]

PMID: 36670376

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe NHS Health Check (NHS HC) is a cardiovascular risk assessment to prevent cardiovascular disease. Public Health England (PHE) wants to increase uptake.MethodsWe explored the impact of behaviourally informed invitation letters and pre-notification and reminder SMS on uptake of NHS HCs. Patients at 28 General Practices in the London Borough of Southwark who were eligible to receive an NHS HC between 1st November 2013 and 31st December 2014 were included. A double-blind randomised controlled trial with a mixed 2 (pre-notification SMS - yes or no) × 4 (letter - national template control, open-ended, time-limited, social norm) × 2 (reminder SMS - yes or no) factorial design was used. The open-ended letter used simplification, behavioural instruction and a personalised planning prompt for patients to record the date and time of their NHS HC. The time-limited letter was similar but stated the NHS HC was due in a named forthcoming month. The social norms letter was similar to the open-ended letter but included a descriptive social norms message and testimonials from local residents and no planning prompt. The outcome measure was attendance at an NHS HC.ResultsData for 12, 244 invites were analysed. Uptake increased in almost all letter and SMS combinations compared to the control letter without SMS (Uptake 18%), with increases of up to 12 percentage points for the time-limited letter with pre-notification and reminder (Uptake 30%; Adjusted Odds Ratio AOR 1.86; 95% CI 1.45-2.83; p < 0.00); 10 percentage points for the open-ended letter with reminder (Uptake 27%; AOR 1.68; 95% CI 1.31-2.17; p < 0.00) and a 9 percentage point increase using the time-limited letter with reminder (Uptake 27%; AOR 1.61; 95% CI 1.25-2.10; p < 0.00). The reminder SMS increased uptake for all intervention letters. The pre-notification did not add to this effect.ConclusionsThis large randomised controlled trial adds support to the evidence that small, low cost behaviourally informed changes to letter-based invitations can increase uptake of NHS HCs. It also provides novel evidence on the effect of SMS reminders and pre-notification on NHS HC attendance.Trial registrationRetrospectively Registered (24/01/2014) ISRCTN36027094 .

Project description:BackgroundParticipation of general practitioners is crucial for health care studies. However, recruiting them is an ongoing challenge and participation rates of general practitioners around the globe are often low. One feasible and cost-efficient approach to potentially enhance participation rates among general practitioners are personalized invitation letters, since they may increase one's attention to and appreciation of a study. Still, evidence whether this method actually affects participation is scarce and ambiguous in relation to physicians.MethodsWe undertook a randomized trial in a sample of general practitioners from three German states in the context of a large, observational study on physicians' coordination and uptake of recommended cardiovascular ambulatory care. An intervention group (n = 757 general practitioners) received a personalized invitation to participate in the observational study, the control group (n = 754 general practitioners) received a generic invitation. Both groups were blinded to group assignment. Eventual participation rates as well as the number and types of responses overall were compared between arms. Besides the main intervention, sociodemographic and geographical context factors were considered as well.ResultsThe overall participation rate among physicians was 2.6% (2.8% in the intervention group and 2.4% in the control group). No statistically significant effect of personalization on participation of physicians was found (relative risk to participate when receiving a personalized invitation of 1.17 [95%-CI: 0.62, 2.21]). However, the number of responses to the invitation varied significantly between the geographical regions.ConclusionsPersonalization of first written contact alone did not improve research participation among general practitioners, which was overall very low.Trial registrationThe study in which the trial was embedded has been registered prospectively at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) under registration number DRKS00019219 .

Project description:ImportanceEvery year during the open enrollment period, hundreds of thousands of individuals across the Affordable Care Act marketplaces begin the enrollment process but fail to complete it, thereby resulting in coverage gaps or going uninsured.ObjectiveTo investigate if low-cost ($0.55 per person) letters can increase health insurance enrollment.Design setting and participantsThis intent-to-treat randomized clinical trial was conducted during the final 2 weeks of the 2015 open enrollment period among the 37 states on the HealthCare.gov platform. The trial targeted 744 510 individuals who started the enrollment process but had yet to complete it. Data were analyzed from January through August 2021.InterventionsStudy participants were randomized to either a no-letter control group or to 1 of 8 letter variants that drew on evidence from the behavioral sciences about what motivates individuals to take action.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the health insurance enrollment rate at the end of the open enrollment period.ResultsOf the 744 510 individuals (mean [SD] age, 41.9 [19.6] years; 53.9% women), 136 122 (18.3%) were in the control group and 608 388 (81.7%) were in the treatment group. Most lived in Medicaid nonexpansion states (72.7%), and a plurality were between 30 and 50 years old (41.0%). For race and ethnicity, 3.0% self-identified as Asian, 14.0% as Black, 5.1% as Hispanic, 39.8% as non-Hispanic White, and 38.2% as other or unknown. By the end of the open enrollment period, 4.0% of the control group enrolled in health insurance coverage. Comparatively, the enrollment rate in the pooled treatment group was 4.3%, which demonstrated an increase of 0.3 percentage points (95% CI, 0.2-0.4 percentage points; P<.001), yielding 1753 marginal enrollments. Letters that used action language caused larger enrollment effects, particularly among Black individuals (increase of 1.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.6-2.7 percentage points; P = .003) and Hispanic individuals (increase of 1.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.0-3.0 percentage points; P = .046) in Medicaid expansion states.Conclusions and relevanceThis randomized clinical trial shows that letters designed with best practices from the behavioral sciences literature were a low-cost way to increase health insurance enrollment in the Affordable Care Act marketplaces. More research is needed to understand what messages are most effective amid the recently passed American Rescue Plan.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05010395.

Project description:BackgroundIn Belgium, schools closed during the first lockdown in March 2020, with a partial reopening in May. They fully reopened in September. During the summer, infections started to increase in the general population, speeding up in September. Some measures were taken to limit social contacts but those were insufficient to mitigate the exponential rise of infections in October. Children were still receiving all lessons at school at that time and it was questioned whether this position was tenable. We systematically compared the benefits and harms of closing primary and secondary schools and developed a recommendation.MethodsA multidisciplinary panel, including school pupils and teachers, educational experts, clinicians and researchers, produced this recommendation in compliance with the standards for trustworthy rapid guidelines. The recommendation is based on data collected through national surveillance or studies from Belgium, and supported by a rapid literature review.ResultsClosing schools during the first lockdown probably resulted in a large learning delay and possibly led to more cases of child abuse. We are uncertain about the effect on the infection rate, hospitalisations, transmission rates, mental health of children, teachers and parents. The panel concluded that the balance of benefits and harms of closing schools clearly shifts against closing schools. Detrimental effects are even worse for vulnerable children. This recommendation is affected by the local virus circulation.ConclusionThe guideline panel issues a strong recommendation against closing schools when the virus circulation is low to moderate, and a weak recommendation against closing schools when the virus circulation is high. It does not apply when the school system cannot function due to lack of teachers, too many children who are at home or a shortage of support services. As the results of international studies are consistent with Belgian study results, this recommendation may also be relevant internationally.

Project description:BackgroundThe enhancement of-or even a shift from-traditional teaching and learning processes to corresponding digital practices has been rapidly occurring during the last two decades. The evidence of this ongoing change is still modest or even weak. However, the adaptation of implementation science in educational settings, a research approach which arose in the healthcare field, offers promising results for systematic and sustained improvements in schools. The aim of this study is to understand how the systematic professional development of teachers and schools principals (the intervention) to use digital learning materials and learning analytics dashboards (the innovations) could allow for innovative and lasting impacts in terms of a sustained implementation strategy, improved teaching practices and student outcomes, as well as evidence-based design of digital learning material and learning analytics dashboards.MethodsThis longitudinal study uses a quasi-experimental cluster design with schools as the unit. The researchers will enroll gradually 145 experimental schools in the study. In the experimental schools the research team will form a School Team, consisting of teachers/learning-technologists, school principals, and researchers, to support teachers' use of the innovations, with student achievement as the dependent variable. For the experimental schools, the intervention is based on the four longitudinal stages comprising the Active Implementation Framework. With an anticipated student sample of about 13,000 students in grades 1-9, student outcomes data are going to be analyzed using hierarchical linear models.DiscussionThe project seeks to address a pronounced need for favorable conditions for children's learning supported by a specific implementation framework targeting teachers, and to contribute with knowledge about the promotion of improved teaching practices and student outcomes. The project will build capacity using implementation of educational technology in Swedish educational settings.

Project description:BackgroundScreening invitations have traditionally been brief, providing information only about population benefits. Presenting information about the limited individual benefits and potential harms of screening to inform choice may reduce attendance, particularly in the more socially deprived. At the same time, amongst those who attend, it might increase motivation to change behavior to reduce risks. This trial assesses the impact on attendance and motivation to change behavior of an invitation that facilitates informed choices about participating in diabetes screening in general practice. Three hypotheses are tested: 1. Attendance at screening for diabetes is lower following an informed choice compared with a standard invitation. 2. There is an interaction between the type of invitation and social deprivation: attendance following an informed choice compared with a standard invitation is lower in those who are more rather than less socially deprived. 3. Amongst those who attend for screening, intentions to change behavior to reduce risks of complications in those subsequently diagnosed with diabetes are stronger following an informed choice invitation compared with a standard invitation.Method/design1500 people aged 40-69 years without known diabetes but at high risk are identified from four general practice registers in the east of England. 1200 participants are randomized by households to receive one of two invitations to attend for diabetes screening at their general practices. The intervention invitation is designed to facilitate informed choices, and comprises detailed information and a decision aid. A comparison invitation is based on those currently in use. Screening involves a finger-prick blood glucose test. The primary outcome is attendance for diabetes screening. The secondary outcome is intention to change health related behaviors in those attenders diagnosed with diabetes. A sample size of 1200 ensures 90% power to detect a 10% difference in attendance between arms, and in an estimated 780 attenders, 80% power to detect a 0.2 sd difference in intention between arms.DiscussionThe DICISION trial is a rigorous pragmatic denominator based clinical trial of an informed choice invitation to diabetes screening, which addresses some key limitations of previous trials.

Dataset Information

Can uptake of childhood influenza immunisation through schools and GP practices be increased through behaviourally-informed invitation letters and reminders: two pragmatic randomized controlled trials.

Background

Methods and results

Conclusion

Trial registration

Publications

Can uptake of childhood influenza immunisation through schools and GP practices be increased through behaviourally-informed invitation letters and reminders: two pragmatic randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets