Literature DB >> 16417962

Diffusion and economic consequences of health technologies in prostate cancer care in Sweden, 1991-2002.

Karin Sennfält1, Per Carlsson, Eberhard Varenhorst.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe the diffusion of six main health technologies used for management of prostate cancer, to estimate the economic consequences of technological changes, and to explore factors behind the diffusion.
METHODS: Data describing the diffusion 1991-2002 were obtained from population-based databases. Costs were obtained from Linköping University Hospital and Apoteket AB. Factors affecting the diffusion of the technologies were explored.
RESULTS: Utilization of technologies with a curative and/or palliative aim has increased over time, except for surgical castration. PSA-tests are used increasingly. The total cost of the study technologies has increased from 20 million euros in 1991 to 65 million euros in 2002. Classification of radical prostatectomy revealed a profile associated with a slow/limited diffusion, while classification of PSA-tests revealed a profile associated with a rapid/extensive diffusion.
CONCLUSIONS: Several technological changes in the management of prostate cancer have occurred without proven benefits and have contributed to increased costs. There are other factors, besides scientific evidence, that have an impact on the diffusion. Consequently, activities aimed at facilitating an appropriate diffusion of new technologies are needed. The analytical framework used here may be helpful in identifying technologies that are likely to experience inappropriate diffusion and therefore need particular attention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16417962     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  5 in total

1.  National economic and development indicators and international variation in prostate cancer incidence and mortality: an ecological analysis.

Authors:  Subas Neupane; Freddie Bray; Anssi Auvinen
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-10-15       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Editorial comment.

Authors:  Terhi Hermanson; Oliver Sartor; Richard J Ablin; Charles L Bennett
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2014-10-24       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  Randomised prostate cancer screening trial: 20 year follow-up.

Authors:  Gabriel Sandblom; Eberhard Varenhorst; Johan Rosell; Owe Löfman; Per Carlsson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2011-03-31

4.  Men's preferences for prostate cancer screening: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  E W de Bekker-Grob; J M Rose; B Donkers; M-L Essink-Bot; C H Bangma; E W Steyerberg
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-01-29       Impact factor: 7.640

5.  Simulation model of disease incidence driven by diagnostic activity.

Authors:  Marcus Westerberg; Rolf Larsson; Lars Holmberg; Pär Stattin; Hans Garmo
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 2.373

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.