Literature DB >> 11463928

Cost effectiveness analysis of a population based screening programme for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women by means of home obtained urine specimens.

I G van Valkengoed1, M J Postma, S A Morré, A J van den Brule, C J Meijer, L M Bouter, A J Boeke.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of a systematic screening programme for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in a female inner city population. To determine the sensitivity of the cost effectiveness analysis to variation in the probability of developing sequelae.
METHODS: A decision tree was constructed to evaluate health effects of the programme, such as averted sequelae of chlamydial infection. Cost effectiveness from a societal perspective was estimated for screening by means of a ligase chain reaction on mailed, home obtained urine specimens, in a population with a C trachomatis test prevalence of 2.9%. An extensive sensitivity analysis was performed for the probability of sequelae, the percentage of preventable pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), and the discount rate.
RESULTS: The estimated net cost of curing one woman, aged 15-40 years, of a C trachomatis infection is US$1210. To prevent one major outcome (PID, tubal factor infertility, ectopic pregnancy, chronic pelvic pain, or neonatal pneumonia), 479 women would have to be screened. The net cost of preventing one major outcome is $15 800. Changing the probability of PID after chlamydial infection from 5% to 25% decreases the net cost per major outcome averted from $28 300 to $6380, a reduction of 78%. Results were less sensitive to variations in estimates for other sequelae. The breakeven prevalence of the programme ranges from 6.4% for the scenario with all probabilities for complications set at the maximum value to a prevalence of 100% for probabilities set at the minimum value.
CONCLUSIONS: Systematic screening of all women aged 15-40 years for asymptomatic C trachomatis infections is not cost effective. Although the results of the analyses are sensitive to variation in the assumptions, the costs exceed the benefits, even in the most optimistic scenario.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11463928      PMCID: PMC1744325          DOI: 10.1136/sti.77.4.276

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sex Transm Infect        ISSN: 1368-4973            Impact factor:   3.519


  21 in total

Review 1.  Sexuality and health: the hidden costs of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis.

Authors:  B Duncan; G Hart
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-04-03

2.  Discounting and health benefits.

Authors:  M Parsonage; H Neuburger
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 3.046

Review 3.  Economic evaluation of influenza vaccination. Assessment for The Netherlands.

Authors:  M J Postma; J M Bos; M van Gennep; J C Jager; R Baltussen; M J Sprenger
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Should asymptomatic patients be tested for Chlamydia trachomatis in general practice?

Authors:  H Buhaug; F E Skjeldestad; L E Halvorsen; A Dalen
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Chlamydia trachomatis infection in women with ectopic pregnancy.

Authors:  R C Brunham; B Binns; J McDowell; M Paraskevas
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1986-05       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  Tubal factor infertility: an association with prior chlamydial infection and asymptomatic salpingitis.

Authors:  J W Sellors; J B Mahony; M A Chernesky; D J Rath
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  1988-03       Impact factor: 7.329

7.  Low diagnostic accuracy of selective screening criteria for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in the general population.

Authors:  I G van Valkengoed; S A Morré; A J van den Brule; C J Meijer; W Devillé; L M Bouter; A J Boeke
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.519

8.  [Opportunistic screening for genital infections with Chlamydia trachomatis in sexually active population of Amsterdam. II. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening women].

Authors:  M J Postma; R Welte; J A van den Hoek; G J van Doornum; R A Coutinho; J C Jager
Journal:  Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd       Date:  1999-03-27

Review 9.  Incidence, prevalence, and trends of acute pelvic inflammatory disease and its consequences in industrialized countries.

Authors:  L Weström
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1980-12-01       Impact factor: 8.661

10.  Prospective study of perinatal transmission of Chlamydia trachomatis.

Authors:  J Schachter; M Grossman; R L Sweet; J Holt; C Jordan; E Bishop
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1986-06-27       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  15 in total

1.  Adherence of pharmacoeconomic studies to national guidelines in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Jarir Atthobari; Jasper M Bos; Cornelis Boersma; Jacobus R B J Brouwers; Lolkje T W de Jong-van den Berg; Maarten J Postma
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  2005-10

2.  Testing for sexually transmitted infections: a brave new world?

Authors:  R W Peeling
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.519

3.  Healthcare and patient costs of a proactive chlamydia screening programme: the Chlamydia Screening Studies project.

Authors:  Suzanne Robinson; Tracy Roberts; Pelham Barton; Stirling Bryan; John Macleod; Anne McCarthy; Matthias Egger; Emma Sanford; Nicola Low
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2007-01-17       Impact factor: 3.519

Review 4.  One to one interventions to reduce sexually transmitted infections and under the age of 18 conceptions: a systematic review of the economic evaluations.

Authors:  L Barham; D Lewis; N Latimer
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2007-07-11       Impact factor: 3.519

Review 5.  Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: a systematic review of the economic evaluations and modelling.

Authors:  T E Roberts; S Robinson; P Barton; S Bryan; N Low
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.519

6.  Chlamydia trachomatis load at matched anatomic sites: implications for screening strategies.

Authors:  Claude-Edouard C Michel; Christopher Sonnex; Christopher A Carne; John A White; Jose Paolo V Magbanua; Elpidio Cesar B Nadala; Helen H Lee
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2007-03-21       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Screening for Sexually Transmitted Infections in Antenatal Care Is Especially Important Among HIV-Infected Women.

Authors:  Sten H Vermund
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 2.830

8.  Chlamydia trachomatis in female sex workers in Belgium: 1998-2003.

Authors:  R P Mak; L Van Renterghem; A Traen
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.519

9.  Prevalence of urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis increases significantly with level of urbanisation and suggests targeted screening approaches: results from the first national population based study in the Netherlands.

Authors:  J van Bergen; H M Götz; J H Richardus; C J P A Hoebe; J Broer; A J T Coenen
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.519

10.  Evaluation of the Digene Hybrid Capture II Assay with the Rapid Capture System for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae.

Authors:  B Van Der Pol; J A Williams; N J Smith; B E Batteiger; A P Cullen; H Erdman; T Edens; K Davis; H Salim-Hammad; V W Chou; L Scearce; J Blutman; W J Payne
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 5.948

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.