Altmetric

Financial disincentives? A three-armed randomised controlled trial of the effect of financial Incentives in Diabetic Eye Assessment by Screening (IDEAS) trial

Title: Financial disincentives? A three-armed randomised controlled trial of the effect of financial Incentives in Diabetic Eye Assessment by Screening (IDEAS) trial
Authors: Judah, G
Darzi, A
Vlaev, I
Gunn, L
King, D
King, D
Valabhji, J
Bicknell, C
Item Type: Journal Article
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: Conflicting evidence exists regarding the impact of financial incentives on encouraging attendance at medical screening appointments. The primary aim was to determine whether financial incentives increase attendance at diabetic eye screening in persistent non-attenders. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A three-armed randomised controlled trial was conducted in London in 2015. 1051 participants aged over 16 years, who had not attended eye screening appointments for 2 years or more, were randomised (1.4:1:1 randomisation ratio) to receive the usual invitation letter (control), an offer of £10 cash for attending screening (fixed incentive) or a 1 in 100 chance of winning £1000 (lottery incentive) if they attend. The primary outcome was the proportion of invitees attending screening, and a comparative analysis was performed to assess group differences. Pairwise comparisons of attendance rates were performed, using a conservative Bonferroni correction for independent comparisons. RESULTS: 34/435 (7.8%) of control, 17/312 (5.5%) of fixed incentive and 10/304 (3.3%) of lottery incentive groups attended. Participants who received any incentive were significantly less likely to attend their appointment compared with controls (risk ratio (RR)=0.56; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.92). Those in the probabilistic incentive group (RR=0.42; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.98), but not the fixed incentive group (RR=1.66; 95% CI 0.65 to 4.21), were significantly less likely to attend than those in the control group. CONCLUSION: Financial incentives, particularly lottery-based incentives, attract fewer patients to diabetic eye screening than standard invites in this population. Financial incentives should not be used to promote screening unless tested in context, as they may negatively affect attendance rates.
Issue Date: 1-Aug-2018
Date of Acceptance: 31-Mar-2018
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/61624
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-311778
ISSN: 0007-1161
Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group
Start Page: 1014
End Page: 1020
Journal / Book Title: British Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume: 102
Issue: 8
Copyright Statement: © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Keywords: Public health
Retina
1103 Clinical Sciences
1113 Ophthalmology And Optometry
1117 Public Health And Health Services
Ophthalmology & Optometry
Publication Status: Published
Conference Place: England
Online Publication Date: 2018-05-23
Appears in Collections:Division of Surgery
Department of Medicine
Faculty of Medicine



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Creative Commonsx