Cost-effectiveness of extending cervical cancer screening intervals among women with prior normal pap tests.

Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Obstetrics and Gynecology (Impact Factor: 4.8). 03/2006; 107(2 Pt 1):321-8. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000196500.50044.ce
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Annual cervical cancer screening in women with many prior normal Pap tests is common despite limited evidence on the cost-effectiveness of this strategy. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of screening women with 3 or more prior normal tests compared with screening those with no prior tests.
We used a validated cost-effectiveness model in conjunction with data on the prevalence of biopsy-proven cervical neoplasia in women enrolled in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. Women were grouped according to age at the final Program Pap test (aged < 30, 30-44, 45-59, and 60-65 years) and by screening history (0, 1, 2, and 3+ consecutive prior normal Program tests) to estimate cost per life-year and quality-adjusted life-year associated with annual, biennial, and triennial screening.
For women aged 30-44 years with no prior tests, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from 20,533 US dollars for screening triennially (compared with no further screening) to 331,837 US dollars for screening annually (compared with biennially) per life-year saved. Among same-aged women with 3 or more prior normal Program tests, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the same measures ranged from 60,029 US dollars to 709,067 US dollars per life-year saved. Inclusion of the most conservative utility estimates resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in excess of 100,000 US dollars per quality-adjusted life-year saved associated with annual screening of same-aged women with 3 or more prior normal tests compared with biennial screening.
As the number of prior normal Pap tests increases, the costs per life-year saved increase substantially. Resources should be prioritized for screening those never or rarely screened women.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to deepen our understanding of the factors that may explain the observational literature that more primary care physicians in an area contribute to better population health outcomes and lower health care costs. METHODS: This study used in-depth, qualitative interviewing of family physicians in both urban and rural, academic, and private practices. Interviews were initiated with a series of grand tour questions asking subjects to give examples and personal narratives demonstrating cost-effectiveness and cost inefficiencies in their own practices. An iterative open-coding approach was used to analyze transcripts to search for unifying themes and sub-themes until consensus among investigators was achieved. RESULTS: Thirty-eight respondents gave examples of how their decision- making approaches resulted in improved patient outcomes and lower costs. Family physicians’ cost-effective care was founded on two themes—characteristic attitudes and skills of the physicians themselves and a thorough knowledge of the whole patient. Family physicians also felt their approaches to gathering information and then making diagnostic and treatment decisions resulted in fewer tests and fewer treatments ordered overall. Family physicians also delivered care in less expensive facilities and generated lower overall charges for physician fees. CONCLUSIONS: Family physicians perceived that their approaches to patient care result in medical decision making priorities and care delivery processes that contribute to more cost-effective health care. These outcomes were achieved less by providing preventive services and strictly adhering to guidelines but rather by how they individualized the management of new symptoms and chronic conditions.
    Family medicine 05/2013; 45(5):311-318. · 1.20 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccine has been added recently to the Iran Drug List. So, decision makers need information beyond that available from RCTs to recommend funding for this vaccination program to add it to the National Immunization program in Iran. Modeling and economic studies have addressed some of those information needs in foreign countries. In order to determine the long term benefit of this vaccine and impact of vaccine program on the future rate of cervical cancer in Iran, we described a model, based on the available economic and health effects of human papilloma virus (HPV), to estimate the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination of 15-year-old girls in Iran. Our objective is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination in Iran against cervical cancer based on available data; incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) calculations were based on a model comparing a cohort of 15-year-old girls with and without vaccination. We developed a static model based on available data in Iran on the epidemiology of HPV related health outcome. The model compared the cohort of all 15-year old girls alive in the year 2013 with and without vaccination. The cost per QALY, which was found based on our assumption for the vaccination of 15-years old girl to current situation was 439,000,000 Iranian Rial rate (IRR). By considering the key parameters in our sensitivity analysis, value varied from 251,000,000 IRR to 842,000,000 IRR. In conclusion, quadrivalent HPV vaccine (Gardasil) is not cost-effective in Iran based on the base-case parameters value.
    Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research (IJPR) 01/2014; 13(Suppl):225-34. · 0.54 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Human papillomavirus (HPV) is definitely recognized as the necessary cause for the development of cancer of the uterine cervix and the detection of HPV-DNA in cervical samples is demonstrated to own a significantly higher sensitivity towards preneoplastic lesions than conventional cytology (Pap test). Screening, management of atypical Pap tests and follow up of treated patients, represent the optimal settings where HPV-DNA testing has been demonstrated of clinical value. Atypical Pap tests account for cases in which the cytological alterations cannot clearly be attributed neither to negative nor to positive cytology; in these cases HPV-DNA testing has been demonstrated to have a sensitivity very close to 100% in identifying patients with an histologically proven intraepithelial preneoplastic lesion of high grade (CIN2-CIN3). Despite this, specificity of HPV-DNA positive testing lacks of significance and the referral rate to second-level colposcopy is too high. Different options have been tested to improve the specificity and the overall performance of HPV-DNA testing in cases of equivocal cervical cytology; the present paper aims to collect and present data from the recent literature, in order to better clarify the present state of the art in this particular aspect of cervical cancer prevention.
    Journal of Virology & Antiviral Research. 07/2013; 2013(2):1.