Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 230–233 | Cite as

Intervention to increase mammography utilization in a public hospital

  • Terry C. Davis
  • Hans J. Berkel
  • Connie L. Arnold
  • Indrani Nandy
  • Robert H. Jackson
  • Peggy W. Murphy
Original Articles


OBJECTIVE: To study the effects of three approaches to increasing utilization of screening mammography in a public hospital setting in Northwest Louisiana.

DESIGN: Randomized intervention study.

POPULATION: Four hundred forty-five women aged 40 years and over, predominantly low-income and with low literacy skills, who had not had a mammogram in the preceding year.

INTERVENTION: All interventions were chosen to motivate women to get a mammogram. Group 1 received a personal recommendation from one of the investigators. Group 2 received the recommendation plus an easy-to-read National Cancer Institute (NCI) brochure. Group 3 received the recommendation, the brochure, and a 12-minute interactive educational and motivational program, including a soap-operastyle video, developed in collaboration with women from the target population.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Mammography utilization was determined at 6 months and 2 years after intervention. A significant increase (p=.05) in mammography utilization was observed after the intervention designed in collaboration with patients (29%) as compared with recommendation alone (21%) or recommendation with brochure (18%) at 6 months. However, at 2 years the difference favoring the custom-made intervention was no longer significant.

CONCLUSIONS: At 6 months there was at least a 30% increase in the mammography utilization rate in the group receiving the intervention designed in collaboration with patients as compared with those receiving the recommendation alone or recommendation with brochure. Giving patients an easy-to-read NCI brochure and a personal recommendation was no more effective than giving them a recommendation alone, suggesting that simply providing women in a public hospital with a low-literacy-level, culturally appropriate brochure is not sufficient to increase screening mammography rates. In a multivariate analysis, the only significant predictor of mammography use at 6 months was the custom-made intervention.

Key words

mammography utilization public hospitals low income low literacy 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Breen N, Kessler L. Changes in the use of screening mammography: evidence from the 1987 and 1990 National Health Interview Surveys. Am J Public Health. 1993;83:948–54.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rakowski W, Rimer BK, Bryant SA. Integrating behavior and intention regarding mammography by respondents in the 1990 National Health Interview Survey of Health Promotion and Disease. Public Health Rep. 1994;84:62–7.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Calle EE, Flanders WD, Thun MJ, Martin LM. Demographic predictors of mammography and Pap smear screening in US women. Am J Public Health. 1993;83:53–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rimer BK, Trock B, Engstrom PF, Lerman C, King E. Why do some women get regular mammograms? Am J Prev Med. 1991;7:697–74.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zapka JG, Stoddard AM, Constanze JE, Greene HL. Breast cancer screening by mammography utilization and associated factors. Am J Public Health. 1989;79:1499–502.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Caplan L, Wells B, Haynes S. Breast cancer screening among older racial/ethnic minorities and whites: barriers to early detection. J Gerontol. 1992;47:101–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moormeier J. Breast cancer in black women. Ann Intern Med. 1996;124:897–905.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Burns R, McCarthy E, Freund K, et al. Black women receive less mammography even with similar use of primary care. Ann Intern Med. 1996;125:173–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mandelblatt J, Andrews H, Kao R, Wallave R, Kerner J. Impact of access and social context on breast cancer stage at diagnosis. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 1995;6:342–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Williams MV, Parker RM, Baker DW, et al. Inadequate functional health literacy among patients at two public hospitals. JAMA. 1995;274:1677–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miles S, Davis T. Patients who cannot read: implication for the Health Care System. JAMA. 1995;274:1719–20. Editorial.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Doak CC, Doak LG. Teaching Patients with Low-Literacy Skills, 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott; 1996.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    National Work Group on Cancer and Literacy. Bethesda, Md: National Cancer Institute, May 7, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    McCarthy B, Yood M, Bolton M, Boohaker E, MacWilliams C, Young M. Redesigning primary care processes to improve the offering of mammography. J Gen Intern Med. 1997;12:357–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Davis T, Arnold C, Berkel H, Nandy I, Jackson R, Glass J. Knowledge and attitude on screening mammography among low-literate, low-income women. Cancer. 1996;78:1912–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Davis TC, Long SW, Jackson RH, et al. Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine: a shortened screening instrument. Fam Med. 1993;25:256–60.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy People 2000: National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives. Washington DC: U.S. Printing Office; 1991:72, 114–5. DHHS publication (PHS) 91-50213.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yancey A, Tanjasiri S, Klein M, Tunder J. Increased cancer screening behavior in women of color by culturally sensitive video exposure. Prev Med. 1995;24:142–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rudd RE, Comings JP. Learner developed materials: an empowering product. Health Educ Q. 1994;21:313–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Eng E. The Save Our Sisters Project: a social network strategy for reaching rural black women. Cancer. 1993;72:1071–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Terry C. Davis
    • 1
    • 2
  • Hans J. Berkel
    • 1
    • 3
  • Connie L. Arnold
    • 2
  • Indrani Nandy
    • 4
  • Robert H. Jackson
    • 1
  • Peggy W. Murphy
    • 1
  1. 1.Received from the Department of Internal MedicineLouisiana State University Medical Center School of MedicineShreveport
  2. 2.Department of PediatricsLouisiana State University Medical Center School of MedicineShreveport
  3. 3.Section of Cancer Prevention and Control, Department of MedicineLouisiana State University Medical Center School of MedicineShreveport
  4. 4.Department of BiometryLouisiana State University Medical Center School of MedicineShreveport

Personalised recommendations