Literature DB >> 15284314

Cost-effectiveness of organized versus opportunistic cervical cytology screening in Hong Kong.

Jane J Kim1, Gabriel M Leung, Pauline P S Woo, Sue J Goldie.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To assess the cost-effectiveness of alternative cervical cancer screening strategies to inform the design and implementation of a government-sponsored population-based screening programme in Hong Kong.
METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis using a computer-based model of cervical carcinogenesis was performed. Strategies included no screening, opportunistic screening (status quo), organized screening using either conventional or liquid-based cytology conducted at different frequencies. The main outcome measures were cancer incidence reduction, years of life saved (YLS), lifetime costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Data were from local hospitals and laboratories, clinical trials, prospective studies and other published literature.
RESULTS: Compared with no screening, a simulation of the current situation of opportunistic screening using cervical cytology produced a nearly 40 per cent reduction in the lifetime risk of cervical cancer. However, with organized screening every 3, 4 and 5 years, corresponding reductions with conventional (and liquid-based) cytology were 90.4 (92.9), 86.8 (90.2) and 83.2 per cent (87.3 per cent) compared with no screening. For all cytology-based screening strategies, opportunistic screening was more costly and less effective than an organized programme of screening every 3, 4 and 5 years. Every 3-, 4- and 5-year screening cost $12,300, $7100 and $800 per YLS, each compared with the next best alternative.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the status quo of opportunistic screening, adopting a policy of organized, mass cervical screening in Hong Kong can substantially increase benefits and reduce costs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15284314     DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdh138

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Public Health (Oxf)        ISSN: 1741-3842            Impact factor:   2.341


  10 in total

Review 1.  Calibration methods used in cancer simulation models and suggested reporting guidelines.

Authors:  Natasha K Stout; Amy B Knudsen; Chung Yin Kong; Pamela M McMahon; G Scott Gazelle
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  See-and-treat approaches to cervical cancer prevention for HIV-infected women.

Authors:  Carla J Chibwesha; Susan Cu-Uvin
Journal:  Curr HIV/AIDS Rep       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 5.071

3.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of human papillomavirus DNA testing and Pap smear for cervical cancer screening in a publicly financed health-care system.

Authors:  I H-I Chow; C-H Tang; S-L You; C-H Liao; T-Y Chu; C-J Chen; C-A Chen; R-F Pwu
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-11-23       Impact factor: 7.640

4.  Estimating the cost of cervical cancer screening in five developing countries.

Authors:  Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Sue J Goldie
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2006-08-03

5.  The prevalence and factors for cancer screening behavior among people with severe mental illness in Hong Kong.

Authors:  Phoenix Kit Han Mo; Winnie Wing Sze Mak; Eddie Siu Kwan Chong; Hanyang Shen; Rebecca Yuen Man Cheung
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-09-30       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Evaluation of the Impact of Human Papillomavirus DNA Self-sampling on the Uptake of Cervical Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Eliza L Y Wong; Paul K S Chan; Josette S Y Chor; Annie W L Cheung; Fenwei Huang; Samuel Y S Wong
Journal:  Cancer Nurs       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.592

Review 7.  Simple but not simpler: a systematic review of Markov models for economic evaluation of cervical cancer screening.

Authors:  Juliana Yukari Kodaira Viscondi; Christine Grutzmann Faustino; Alessandro Gonçalves Campolina; Alexander Itria; Patricia Coelho de Soárez
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2018-07-10       Impact factor: 2.365

8.  Modeling human papillomavirus and cervical cancer in the United States for analyses of screening and vaccination.

Authors:  Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Natasha K Stout; Jesse Ortendahl; Karen M Kuntz; Sue J Goldie; Joshua A Salomon
Journal:  Popul Health Metr       Date:  2007-10-29

9.  Health economic evaluations of medical devices in the People's Republic of China: A systematic literature review.

Authors:  Rongrong Zhang; Farhang Modaresi; Oleg Borisenko
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2015-04-09

10.  Level and Factors Associated with Participation in Population-Based Cancer Screening in Safranbolu District of Karabuk, Turkey.

Authors:  Raziye Özdemir; Fatma TÜrkmen Çevik; Duygu Kes; Merve Karacali; Simge ÖzgÜner
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 1.429

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.