Authors: Katrine Frønsdal, Stefan Sauerland and Ingvil Sæterdal
Internal reviewers: Pseudo164 Pseudo164, Pseudo179 Pseudo179, Pseudo71 Pseudo71, Pseudo98 Pseudo98
The SR by Cosford et al. was the only SR to report patients’ acceptance of AAA screening programmes (Cosford 2007). This SR was determined to be of high quality (Appendix EFF-2, Section 2). However, this was not a pre-defined outcome, and the authors report acceptance rates from the RCTs included in the SR in narrative form only.
Cosford et al. reported acceptance rates ranging between 63% (Norman 2004) and 80% (Ashton 2002). In one trial the acceptance rate increased from 63% to 70% when, after randomisation, patients who were identified as too unwell or previously scanned were excluded (Norman 2004).
According to the SR, only one trial recorded acceptance rates by age (Scott 1995). In this trial men and women aged 65 accepted the invitation to screen most often (81% and 73% respectively), but acceptance decreased with age and was lowest for men and women aged 76 to 80 years (66% and 58% respectively).
As this research question also is covered in the Social Aspects domain (SOC), result card SOC5 is referred to for EFF15.