Abstract
Background Many patients are unaware of their stroke risk. The purpose of this research was to compare the effect of behaviorally tailored mailed messages on patient activation to reduce stroke risk.
Methods We used electronic health records to construct Framingham Stroke Risk Scores (FSRS) in primary care patients from one Veterans Health Administration (VA) and one non-VA healthcare system, Eskenazi Health System (EHS). Four stroke risk messages were developed through patient interviews: standard, incentive ($5 gift card), salience, and incentive plus salience. Patients in the highest FSRS quintile were randomly assigned to receive one of the messages. All letters asked the patient to call a stroke prevention coordinator. Response to the messages was modeled separately in the two cohorts using logistic regression.
Results From 6,695 eligible patients, 2,084 EHS patients (mean age 65.6, 36% male, 68% Black, mean FSRS 13.1) and 1,759 VA patients (mean age 75.6, 99% male, 86% White, mean FSRS 18.6) received a letter. Rates of calls to the coordinator were 13% among the EHS and 23% among the VA cohort. The EHS cohort was significantly more likely to respond to the incentive message compared to the standard message (OR = 1.97 [1.17, 3.09]), and the VA cohort was more likely to respond to the incentive plus salience message (OR = 1.50 [1.02, 2.22]). Older age (for VA) and Black race (for EHS) were also significantly associated with response. Among individuals calling the coordinator, 30% of the EHS cohort and 26% of the VA cohort were unaware they had stroke risk factors.
Conclusions A mailed message including a $5 incentive was more effective than a standard message in engaging high-risk patients with their healthcare system; including a salience message may also be important in some patient populations. Many primary care patients are unaware of their stroke risk.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, ID NCT02721446
Funding Statement
This work was supported by an unrestricted grant from Genentech, #G-36890, and by contributed support from the VA HSR&D EXTEND Quality Enhancement Research Initiative program (QUE 15-280).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Not Applicable
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This project was approved by the Indiana University Institutional Review Board, which has authority for projects conducted in both health systems, and by the Roudebush VA Research and Development Review committee.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Not Applicable
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Not Applicable
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Not Applicable
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and to the extent allowable by institutional data use agreements.
