The effect of an educational brochure on knowledge and early detection of melanoma

• Published in: Australian Journal of Public Health 1995-06, Vol.19 (3), p.270-274
• Main Authors: Hanrahan, Pauline F., Hersey, Peter, Watson, Alan B., Callaghan, Terry M.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Brochures; Charts; Discrimination; Education; Educational materials; Intervention; Knowledge; Lesions; Melanoma; Public health; Questionnaires; Skin diseases; Skin lesions
• ISSN: 1326-0200; 1035-7319; 1753-6405
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1753-6405.1995.tb00442.x

Men over the age of 45 present with thicker, more advanced melanomas than younger people. A randomised trial was conducted in this group to evaluate whether an educational brochure would increase knowledge about melanoma and the ability to recognise and discriminate between pigmented skin lesions. Men in an industrial complex were allocated to an intervention group (n = 110) and two control groups (n = 96 and n = 108). The intervention group was given two educational brochures about melanoma. Their effect on knowledge and ability to detect pigmented lesions was assessed by a questionnaire and a self‐examination body chart given before the brochure, and at four weeks and three months after return of the brochure. The control groups did not receive any educational material, but control group 2 received the questionnaire and chart. At the end of the study all participants were examined for pigmented lesions by doctors, whose counts were compared with those of the participants. There was a significant (19.8 per cent) increase in knowledge about melanoma in the intervention group (but not in the control groups), except for discrimination of photos of benign and malignant lesions. The educational material did not improve the ability of those in the intervention group to recognise and count their pigmented lesions nor to discriminate between benign and malignant pigmented lesions. The increased knowledge about melanoma was retained for at least three months. (Aust J Public Health 1995; 19: 270–4)