Literature DB >> 15786532

Feasible economic strategies to improve screening compliance for colorectal cancer in Korea.

Sang Min Park1, Young Ho Yun, Soonman Kwon.   

Abstract

AIM: While colorectal cancer (CRC) is an ideal target for population screening, physician and patient attitudes contribute to low levels of screening uptake. This study was carried out to find feasible economic strategies to improve the CRC screening compliance in Korea.
METHODS: The natural history of a simulated cohort of 50-year-old Korean in the general population was modeled with CRC screening until the age of 80 years. Cases of positive results were worked up with colonoscopy. After polypectomy, colonoscopy was repeated every 3 years. Baseline screening compliance without insurance coverage by the national health insurance (NHI) was assumed to be 30%. If NHI covered the CRC screening or the reimbursement of screening to physicians increased, the compliance was assumed to increase. We evaluated 16 different CRC screening strategies based on Markov model.
RESULTS: When the NHI did not cover the screening and compliance was 30%, non-dominated strategies were colonoscopy every 5 years (COL5) and colonoscopy every 3 years (COL3). In all scenarios of various compliance rates with raised coverage of the NHI and increased reimbursement of colonoscopy, COL10, COL5 and COL3 were non-dominated strategies, and COL10 had lower or minimal incremental medical cost and financial burden on the NHI than the strategy of no screening. These results were stable with sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSION: Economic strategies for promoting screening compliance can be accompanied by expanding insurance coverage by the NHI and by increasing reimbursement for CRC screening to providers. COL10 was a cost-effective and cost saving screening strategy for CRC in Korea.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15786532      PMCID: PMC4305936          DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v11.i11.1587

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 1007-9327            Impact factor:   5.742


  32 in total

1.  Utilization of colorectal cancer screening tests: a 1997 survey of Massachusetts internists.

Authors:  P C Schroy; A C Geller; M Crosier Wood; M Page; L Sutherland; L J Holm; T Heeren
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 4.018

2.  Small primary adenocarcinomas of the colon and rectum.

Authors:  J S SPRATT; L V ACKERMAN
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1962-02-03       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 3.  Occult blood screening. Obstacles to effectiveness.

Authors:  D A Ahlquist
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1992-09-01       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of strategies for colorectal cancer screening in Japan.

Authors:  T Shimbo; H A Glick; J M Eisenberg
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 2.188

Review 5.  Current colorectal cancer screening strategies: overview and obstacles to implementation.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Rev Gastroenterol Disord       Date:  2002

6.  Explaining physician rates of providing flexible sigmoidoscopy.

Authors:  D E Montaño; W R Phillips; D Kasprzyk
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 4.254

7.  Polyps of the large intestine in Northern Norway.

Authors:  T J Eide; H Stalsberg
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1978-12       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Medicare coverage, supplemental insurance, and the use of mammography by older women.

Authors:  J Blustein
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1995-04-27       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Natural history of untreated colonic polyps.

Authors:  S J Stryker; B G Wolff; C E Culp; S D Libbe; D M Ilstrup; R L MacCarty
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 22.682

10.  Early colorectal carcinoma with special reference to its development de novo.

Authors:  T Shimoda; M Ikegami; J Fujisaki; T Matsui; S Aizawa; E Ishikawa
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1989-09-01       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  6 in total

1.  What is the most cost-effective strategy to screen for second primary colorectal cancers in male cancer survivors in Korea?

Authors:  Sang-Min Park; Sun-Young Kim; Craig-C Earle; Seung-Yong Jeong; Young-Ho Yun
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-07-07       Impact factor: 5.742

2.  Colorectal cancer screening with odour material by canine scent detection.

Authors:  Hideto Sonoda; Shunji Kohnoe; Tetsuro Yamazato; Yuji Satoh; Gouki Morizono; Kentaro Shikata; Makoto Morita; Akihiro Watanabe; Masaru Morita; Yoshihiro Kakeji; Fumio Inoue; Yoshihiko Maehara
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2011-01-31       Impact factor: 23.059

3.  Cost Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening Interventions with Their Effects on Health Disparity Being Considered.

Authors:  Kwang-Sig Lee; Eun-Cheol Park
Journal:  Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 4.679

4.  A survey on the impact of operation volume on rectal cancer management.

Authors:  Sun Il Lee; Yoon Ah Park; Seung Kook Sohn
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 2.153

5.  The comparative cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening using faecal immunochemical test vs. colonoscopy.

Authors:  Martin C S Wong; Jessica Y L Ching; Victor C W Chan; Joseph J Y Sung
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-09-04       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Review of economic evidence in the prevention and early detection of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Kim E Jeong; John A Cairns
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2013-09-12
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.