Literature DB >> 16777546

Colorectal cancer screening: health impact and cost effectiveness.

Michael V Maciosek1, Leif I Solberg, Ashley B Coffield, Nichol M Edwards, Michael J Goodman.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States, yet recommended screenings are not delivered to most people. This assessment of colorectal cancer screening's value to the U.S. population is part of the update to a 2001 ranking of recommended clinical preventive services found in the accompanying article. This article describes the burden of disease prevented and cost-effectiveness as a result of offering patients a choice of colorectal cancer screening tools.
METHODS: Methods used were designed to ensure consistent estimates across many services and are described in more detail in the companion articles. In a secondary analysis, the authors also estimated the impact of increasing offers for colorectal cancer screening above current levels among the current cross-section of adults aged 50 and older.
RESULTS: If a birth cohort of 4 million were offered screening at recommended intervals, 31,500 deaths would be prevented and 338,000 years of life would be gained over the lifetime of the birth cohort. In the current cross-section of people aged 50 and older, 18,800 deaths could be prevented each year by offering all people in this group screening at recommended intervals. Only 58% of these deaths are currently being prevented. In year 2000 dollars, the cost effectiveness of offering patients aged 50 and older a choice of colorectal cancer screening options is $11,900 per year of life gained.
CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal cancer screening is a high-impact, cost-effective service used by less than half of persons aged 50 and older.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16777546     DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2006.03.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Prev Med        ISSN: 0749-3797            Impact factor:   5.043


  41 in total

1.  Patient activation increases colorectal cancer screening rates: a randomized trial among low-income minority patients.

Authors:  Mira L Katz; James L Fisher; Kelly Fleming; Electra D Paskett
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 2.  CT colonography and cost-effectiveness.

Authors:  Ifigeneia Mavranezouli; James E East; Stuart A Taylor
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-06-27       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Exploring a Culturally Relevant Model of Cancer Prevention Involving Traditional Chinese Medicine Providers in a Chinese American Community.

Authors:  Jun Wang; Adam Burke; Janice Y Tsoh; Gem Le; Ching Wong; Elaine Chow; Lei-Chun Fung; Tung T Nguyen
Journal:  Eur J Integr Med       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 1.314

4.  Feasibility of a call-in centre to deliver colorectal cancer screening in primary care.

Authors:  Maida J Sewitch; Mengzhu Jiang; Roland Grad; Mark Yaffe; Alan Pavilanis; Lawrence Joseph; Alan N Barkun; Mark Roper
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.275

5.  Informed decision making changes test preferences for colorectal cancer screening in a diverse population.

Authors:  Navkiran K Shokar; Carol A Carlson; Susan C Weller
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2010 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.166

6.  Underuse and Overuse of Colonoscopy for Repeat Screening and Surveillance in the Veterans Health Administration.

Authors:  Caitlin C Murphy; Robert S Sandler; Janet M Grubber; Marcus R Johnson; Deborah A Fisher
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2015-10-19       Impact factor: 11.382

7.  Translation to practice of an intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among African Americans.

Authors:  Selina Smith; Larry Johnson; Diane Wesley; Kim B Turner; Gail McCray; Joyce Sheats; Daniel Blumenthal
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2012-08-07       Impact factor: 4.689

8.  Automated volumetric analysis for comparison of oral sulfate solution (SUPREP) with established cathartic agents at CT colonography.

Authors:  Peter Bannas; Joshua Bakke; James L Patrick; Perry J Pickhardt
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2015-01

9.  Colorectal cancer test use among Californians of Mexican origin: influence of language barriers.

Authors:  Marilyn Johnson-Kozlow; Stergios Roussos; Liza Rovniak; Melbourne Hovell
Journal:  Ethn Dis       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.847

10.  Effectiveness of a simplified "patient friendly" split dose polyethylene glycol colonoscopy prep in Veterans Health Administration patients.

Authors:  Benjamin Cohen; Raymond S Tang; Erik Groessl; Ann Herrin; Samuel B Ho
Journal:  J Interv Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-10-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.