TY - JOUR
T1 - Mapping non-response in a prevention program for cardiometabolic diseases in primary care
T2 - How to improve participation?
AU - Badenbroek, Ilse F.
AU - Nielen, Marcus M.J.
AU - Hollander, Monika
AU - Stol, Daphne M.
AU - Drijkoningen, Astrid E.
AU - Kraaijenhagen, Roderik A.
AU - de Wit, Niek J.
AU - Schellevis, François G.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors thank NIPED Institute for the contribution to data management.
Funding Information:
This work was supported by ZonMW (The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development) under grant number 50-51515-98-192; Lekker Lang Leven (a collaboration of the Dutch Diabetes Research Foundation, the Dutch Heart Foundation and the Dutch Kidney Foundation) under grant number 2012.20.1595; and Innovatiefonds Zorgverzekeraars (Healthcare Insurance Innovation Fund) under grant number 2582.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Authors
PY - 2020/9
Y1 - 2020/9
N2 - Non-response in prevention programs for cardiometabolic diseases (CMD) in primary care is often overlooked. The aim for this study was to define factors that influence the primary response to a selective CMD prevention program and to determine response-enhancing strategies that influence the willingness to participate. We conducted a non-response analysis within a randomized controlled trial evaluating a selective CMD prevention program, the study was conducted from 2013 to 2018 in Netherlands. A random sample of 5616 patients from 15 general practices were invited to complete a risk score (RS) as initial step of the program. Non-responders received an additional questionnaire. The response on the risk score was 51% (n = 2872). From the 3558 non-response questionnaires sent, 786 (22%) were returned. In a multivariable multilevel regression analysis smoking was independently associated with non-response. Of all reported reasons for non-response ‘forgot/no time’ accounted for 45%. In total, 73% of the non-responders indicated to reconsider participation when approached differently. A personal approach by the patients’ own GP, using advertisements and informative campaigns are potentially the best methods to enhance the response. Although a relatively high proportion did not respond to the invitation for the risk score, the majority of them indicated to be willing to participate if a different invitation strategy would be used. With more time and energy, response rates for CMD prevention programs could possibly increase substantially. A next logical step in this process is to test potential response enhancing strategies in research setting.
AB - Non-response in prevention programs for cardiometabolic diseases (CMD) in primary care is often overlooked. The aim for this study was to define factors that influence the primary response to a selective CMD prevention program and to determine response-enhancing strategies that influence the willingness to participate. We conducted a non-response analysis within a randomized controlled trial evaluating a selective CMD prevention program, the study was conducted from 2013 to 2018 in Netherlands. A random sample of 5616 patients from 15 general practices were invited to complete a risk score (RS) as initial step of the program. Non-responders received an additional questionnaire. The response on the risk score was 51% (n = 2872). From the 3558 non-response questionnaires sent, 786 (22%) were returned. In a multivariable multilevel regression analysis smoking was independently associated with non-response. Of all reported reasons for non-response ‘forgot/no time’ accounted for 45%. In total, 73% of the non-responders indicated to reconsider participation when approached differently. A personal approach by the patients’ own GP, using advertisements and informative campaigns are potentially the best methods to enhance the response. Although a relatively high proportion did not respond to the invitation for the risk score, the majority of them indicated to be willing to participate if a different invitation strategy would be used. With more time and energy, response rates for CMD prevention programs could possibly increase substantially. A next logical step in this process is to test potential response enhancing strategies in research setting.
KW - Cardiovascular Diseases
KW - Health Risk Behaviors
KW - Primary Prevention
KW - Refusal to Participate
KW - Risk Assessment
KW - Risk Factors
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85084824247&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.pmedr.2020.101092
DO - 10.1016/j.pmedr.2020.101092
M3 - Article
C2 - 32461878
AN - SCOPUS:85084824247
SN - 2211-3355
VL - 19
JO - Preventive Medicine Reports
JF - Preventive Medicine Reports
M1 - 101092
ER -