Abstract

Organized breast cancer screening (BCS) programs rely on written communication materials for achieving participation and informing women about screening-related benefits and limits. In order to achieve informed decisions and to maximize reader acceptance, the Agency for Health Protection of the metropolitan area of Milan aimed at improving the communication materials of the local BCS program through a multiphase, mixed-method process. Multidisciplinary working groups drafted three sets of materials: postal letters, an informative leaflet, and a question-and-answer online set. Readability was assessed using the Italian language-tailored Gulpease index. Suitability and Comprehensibility were assessed using the SAM + CAM instrument. User perception was investigated through “think aloud” interviews in two consecutive purposive samples. Participants’ intention to participate in the program was also assessed. After each phase was completed, materials were readapted, and previous phases were repeated, to maintain the pre-defined Gulpease and SAM + CAM targets. During the quality improvement process, the overall mean Gulpease and SAM + CAM scores increased from 65.5 (s. d. 10.4) to 67.7 (s. d. 8.2) and from 78 (s. d. 5.6) to 83 (s. d. 4.1), respectively. In light of the results of the first round of interviews, materials underwent rewriting and layout revision, which was generally appreciated during the second round, with a non-significant increase in the intention to participate in the program. However, negative emotions and miscomprehension concerning overdiagnosis were frequently reported, although less frequent in the second round, after rewording of the text. The mixed-method multistep process involving all the relevant key players allowed a balance among the multifaceted aspects of communication.

Highlights

  • Screening through biennial mammography can reduce a woman’s risk of dying from breast cancer (BC) (Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening, 2012)

  • The overall mean Gulpease index improved throughout the quality improvement process from 65.5 (s. d. 10.4) for first drafts, to 67.7 (s. d. 8.2) for the final versions (Table 1)

  • Readability was reduced following the first round of interviews, as new parts of a syntactically more complex text had been added (Gulpease index 60.2-final version, +3.3 points overall)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Screening through biennial mammography can reduce a woman’s risk of dying from breast cancer (BC) (Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening, 2012). Organized breast cancer screening (BCS) programs, such as the one provided by the local Agency for Health Protection in the metropolitan area of Milan, rely on written communication materials for the dual purpose of achieving participation and informing women about BCS-related benefits and limits, in line with best practice recommendations (Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening, 2012; European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer, 2019). Providing balanced information regarding the benefits and unintended harms of BCS, overdiagnosis in particular, improves women’s ability to make an informed choice, but appears to negatively affect the intention to undergo BCS (MartínezAlonso et al, 2017; Ivlev et al, 2017). The ethical duty of providing complete and balanced information should weigh heavier than nudging women to attend the program (Ploug et al, 2012)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call