Show simple item record  

dc.contributor.authorOetzel, John G.en_NZ
dc.contributor.authorLao, Chunhuanen_NZ
dc.contributor.authorMorley, Michelleen_NZ
dc.contributor.authorPenman, Kathyen_NZ
dc.contributor.authorChild, Mareeen_NZ
dc.contributor.authorScott, Ninaen_NZ
dc.contributor.authorKaralus, Miinaen_NZ
dc.date.accessioned2019-06-13T00:24:45Z
dc.date.available2019-04-05en_NZ
dc.date.available2019-06-13T00:24:45Z
dc.date.issued2019en_NZ
dc.identifier.citationOetzel, J. G., Lao, C., Morley, M., Penman, K., Child, M., Scott, N., & Karalus, M. (2019). Efficacy of an incentive intervention on secondary prophylaxis for young people with rheumatic fever: a multiple baseline study. BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-6695-3en
dc.identifier.issn1471-2458en_NZ
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10289/12614
dc.description.abstractBackground Acute rheumatic fever in New Zealand persists and is a barometer of equity as its burden almost exclusively falls on Māori and Pacific Island populations. The primary objective of this study is to determine whether an incentive programme will result in increased secondary prophylaxis injections over a one-year period compared to a baseline period prior to the intervention. Methods The evaluation used a multiple baseline study to determine whether an incentive consisting of a mobile phone and monthly “top-up” (for data/calls) resulted in increased injections, increased texts/calls with nurses, reduced number of visits to get a successful injection, less medicine wasted, and increased nurse satisfaction. Participants were 77 young people (aged 14–21) on an acute rheumatic fever registry in Waikato region, New Zealand classified as either fully adherent (all injections received and no more than one late) or partially adherent based on injections at baseline. Results There was a sharp increase in injections for intermittent patients post-intervention and then a slight decrease overtime, while fully adherent patients maintained their high rate of injections (p = .003). A similar pattern for nurse satisfaction emerged (p = .001). The number of calls/texts increased for all patients (p = .003). The number of visits went down for partially adherent patients and up for fully adherent patients (p = .012). The overall incremental cost-effectiveness was $989 per extra successful injection although costs increased sharply toward the end of the intervention. Conclusions Incentivising secondary prophylaxis appears to have a strong impact for partially adherent patients, particularly during the early periods following the initiation of the intervention. Enhancing communication with patients who returned to care may result in more sustainable adherence. Trial registration Retrospectively registered: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12618001150235, 12 July 2018.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoenen_NZ
dc.publisherBMCen_NZ
dc.rights© The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
dc.subjectScience & Technologyen_NZ
dc.subjectLife Sciences & Biomedicineen_NZ
dc.subjectPublic, Environmental & Occupational Healthen_NZ
dc.subjectRheumatic feveren_NZ
dc.subjectMaorien_NZ
dc.subjectIncentivesen_NZ
dc.subjectMedication adherenceen_NZ
dc.subjectYoung peopleen_NZ
dc.subjectHEART-DISEASEen_NZ
dc.subjectBENZATHINE PENICILLINen_NZ
dc.subjectFINANCIAL INCENTIVESen_NZ
dc.subjectNEW-ZEALANDen_NZ
dc.subjectADHERENCEen_NZ
dc.subjectEPIDEMIOLOGYen_NZ
dc.subjectPREVENTIONen_NZ
dc.titleEfficacy of an incentive intervention on secondary prophylaxis for young people with rheumatic fever: a multiple baseline studyen_NZ
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12889-019-6695-3en_NZ
dc.relation.isPartOfBMC PUBLIC HEALTHen_NZ
pubs.elements-id236605
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden_NZ
pubs.volume19en_NZ
uow.identifier.article-noARTN 385


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record