How Effective Are Short Message Service Reminders at Increasing Clinic Attendance? A Meta‐Analysis and Systematic Review

Guy, Rebecca; Hocking, Jane S; Wand, Handan; Stott, Sam; Ali, Hammad; Kaldor, John

doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2011.01342.x

Cited by 299 publications

(254 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

237

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…a systematic review of SMS reminder systems (e.g. Guy et al 44 ), or to explore the role of information technologies for multiple aspects along a patient care pathway, one of which might be appointment reminder systems ( Table 3). As a consequence, existing systematic reviews did not match our own review question, being either narrower in terms of technology or health condition or including only a limited number of eligible studies within their broader inclusion criteria.…”

Section: Results Of Searchesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Evidence from systematic reviews Our literature searches (see Chapter 3) identified 11 systematic reviews [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52] that met our inclusion criteria, namely systematic reviews that:…”

Section: Results Of Searchesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two very recent reviews 42,43 and two earlier reviews 49,51 are Cochrane reviews and are therefore scrutinised against the highest quality standards. Four reviews 44,45,50,52 all passed the CRD systematic review quality threshold. The review by Hasvold and Wootton, 47 although an extremely informative source for our subsequent review, did not pass the minimum essential criteria for systematic reviews required by the CRD.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Systematic Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a recent systematic review, Guy et al 44 performed subgroup analyses by age. They found no significant subgroup differences in reminder effectiveness by broad target age groups (i.e.…”

Section: Proposition F: Distal/proxy Individual Attributesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Targeting the Use of Reminders and Notifications for Uptake by Populations (TURNUP): a systematic review and evidence synthesis

McLean

Gee

Booth

et al. 2014

Health Services and Delivery Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMissed appointments are an avoidable cost and a resource inefficiency that impact on the health of the patient and treatment outcomes. Health-care services are increasingly utilising reminder systems to counter these negative effects.ObjectivesThis project explores the differential effect of reminder systems for different segments of the population for improving attendance, cancellation and rescheduling of appointments.DesignThree inter-related reviews of quantitative and qualitative evidence relating to theoretical explanations for appointment behaviour (review 1), the effectiveness of different approaches to reminding patients to attend health service appointments (review 2) and factors likely to influence non-attendance (review 3).Data sourcesDatabase searches were conducted on Allied and Complementary Medicine, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Plus with Full Text, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE (via NHS Evidence from 1 January 2000 to January/February 2012), Health Management Information Consortium database, Institute of Electrical and Electronics EngineersXplore, The King’s Fund Library Catalogue, Maternity and Infant Care, MEDLINE, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science from 1 January 2000 to January/February 2012. Supplementary screening of references of included studies was conducted to identify additional potentially relevant studies. Conceptual papers were identified for review 1, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews for review 2 and a range of quantitative and qualitative research designs for review 3.MethodsWe conducted three inter-related reviews of quantitative and qualitative evidence, involving a review of conceptual frameworks of reminder systems and adherence behaviours, a review of the reminder effectiveness literature and a review informed by realist principles to explain the contexts and mechanisms that explain reminder effectiveness. A preliminary conceptual framework was developed to show how reminder systems work, for whom they work and in which circumstances. Six themes emerged that potentially influence the effectiveness of the reminder or whether or not patients would attend their appointment, namely the reminder–patient interaction, reminder accessibility, health-care settings, wider social issues, cancellation and rebookings, and distal/proxy attributes. Standardised review methods were used to investigate the effectiveness of reminders to promote attendance, cancellation or rebooking across all outpatient settings. Finally, a review informed by realist principles was undertaken, using the conceptual framework to explain the context and mechanisms that influence how reminders support attendance, cancellation and rebooking.ResultsA total of 466 papers relating to 463 studies were identified for reviews 2 and 3. Findings from 31 RCTs and 11 separate systematic reviews (review 2 only) revealed that reminder systems are consistently effective at reducing non-attendance at appointments, regardless of health-care setting or patient subgroups. Simple reminders that provide details of timing and location of appointments are effective for increasing attendance at appointments. Reminders that provide additional information over and above the date, time and location of the appointment (‘reminder plus’) may be more effective than simple reminders at reducing non-attendance and may be particularly useful for first appointments and screening appointments; simple reminders may be appropriate thereafter for most patients the majority of the time. There was strong evidence that the timing of reminders, between 1 and 7 days prior to the appointment, has no effect on attendance; substantial numbers of patients do not receive their reminder; reminders promote cancellation of appointments; inadequate structural factors prevent patients from cancelling appointments; and few studies investigated factors that influence the effectiveness of reminder systems for population subgroups.LimitationsGenerally speaking, the systematic review method seeks to provide a precise answer to a tightly focused question, for which there is a high degree of homogeneity within the studies. A wide range of population types, intervention, comparison and outcomes is included within the RCTs we identified. However, use of this wider approach offers greater analytical capability in terms of understanding contextual and mechanistic factors that would not have been evident in a more narrowly focused review and increases confidence that the findings will have relevance in a wide range of service settings.ConclusionsSimple reminders or ‘reminder plus’ should be sent to all patients in the absence of any clear contraindication. Other reminder alternatives may be relevant for key groups of patients: those from a deprived background, ethnic minorities, substance abusers and those with comorbidities and/or illnesses. We are developing a practice guideline that may help managers to further tailor their reminder systems for their service and client groups. We recommend future research activities in three main areas. First, more studies should routinely consider the potential for differential effects of reminder systems between patient groups in order to identify any inequalities and remedies. Second, ‘reminder plus’ systems appear promising, but there is a need for further research to understand how they influence attendance behaviour. Third, further research is required to identify strategies to ‘optimise’ reminder systems and compare performance with current approaches.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

show abstract

Section: Results Of Searchesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Results Of Searchesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Characteristics Of Included Systematic Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a recent systematic review, Guy et al 44 performed subgroup analyses by age. They found no significant subgroup differences in reminder effectiveness by broad target age groups (i.e.…”

Section: Proposition F: Distal/proxy Individual Attributesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Targeting the Use of Reminders and Notifications for Uptake by Populations (TURNUP): a systematic review and evidence synthesis

McLean

Gee

Booth

et al. 2014

Health Services and Delivery Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…4,5 IT such as mobile phone 36 tools including texting and apps contribute to improved medication adherence, 6 increased clinic 37 attendance rates, 7 increased vaccination rates, 8 and behavior changes such as reduction in 38 smoking in non-homeless populations. 9 While some of this research examines use of information understand homeless veteran's access to and use of information technologies, and whether using 44 these technologies to communicate with health care providers would be acceptable to them.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Preliminary needs assessment of mobile technology use for healthcare among homeless veterans

McInnes¹

2014

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Association of Use of Electronic Appointment Reminders With Waiting Times in the Veterans Affairs Health System

Zhao

Lim

et al. 2022

JAMA Netw Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IMPORTANCE Electronic appointment reminder systems are increasingly used across health systems. However, their association with patients' waiting times for their appointments, a measure of timely access to care, has yet to be assessed. OBJECTIVETo assess the associations between the introduction of an electronic appointment reminder system and the number of days patients had to wait from appointment booking to appointment completion in patients in the Veterans Affairs Health System. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Cohort study of patients who completed appointmentsfrom January 1, 2018, to October 13, 2018, inclusive in all 130 Veterans Affairs (VA) health centers in the US. The study population comprised a census of all patients who received care at any VA health center during the period of the study for outpatient, procedural, rehabilitation, or radiology services.

show abstract

How Effective Are Short Message Service Reminders at Increasing Clinic Attendance? A Meta‐Analysis and Systematic Review

Cited by 299 publications

References 51 publications

Targeting the Use of Reminders and Notifications for Uptake by Populations (TURNUP): a systematic review and evidence synthesis

Targeting the Use of Reminders and Notifications for Uptake by Populations (TURNUP): a systematic review and evidence synthesis

Preliminary needs assessment of mobile technology use for healthcare among homeless veterans

Association of Use of Electronic Appointment Reminders With Waiting Times in the Veterans Affairs Health System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About