Literature DB >> 17764095

HPV triage testing or repeat Pap smear for the management of atypical squamous cells (ASCUS) on Pap smear: is there evidence of process utility?

Kirsten Howard1, Glenn Salkeld, Kirsten McCaffery, Les Irwig.   

Abstract

A two-stage standard gamble was used to evaluate women's preferences for alternative managements of atypical squamous cells of undermined significance (ASCUS) on Pap smear (repeat Pap smear compared with immediate HPV test), and to test for the evidence of process utility. Women's utilities for the health state scenarios were clustered towards the upper end of the 0-1 scale with considerable variability in women's preferences. There was evidence of process utility, with immediate human papillomavirus (HPV) testing strategies having lower valuations than repeat Pap smear, where the clinical outcome was the same. Mean (95% CI) utilities for HPV testing (negative test) followed by resolution were 0.9967 (0.9957-0.9978) compared with repeat Pap smear followed by resolution: 0.9972 (0.9964-0.9980). Mean (95% CI) utilities for immediate HPV testing (positive test), followed by colposcopy, biopsy and treatment were 0.9354 (0.8544-1.0) compared with repeat Pap smear followed by colposcopy, biopsy and treatment: 0.9656 (0.9081-1.0). Our results add to the existing evidence that the impact of healthcare interventions on well-being is not limited to the effect of the intervention on the health outcomes expected from the intervention; process of care can have quality of life implications for the individual. A modelled application of trial-based data will allow characterisation of the true population costs, benefits, risks and harms of alternative triage strategies and subsequent policy implications thereof.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 17764095     DOI: 10.1002/hec.1278

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Econ        ISSN: 1057-9230            Impact factor:   3.046


  12 in total

1.  Assessing Preferences Regarding Healthcare Interventions that Involve Non-Health Outcomes: An Overview of Clinical Studies.

Authors:  Brent C Opmeer; Corianne A J M de Borgie; Ben W J Mol; Patrick M M Bossuyt
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2010-03-01       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 2.  Incorporating process utility into quality adjusted life years: a systematic review of empirical studies.

Authors:  Victoria K Brennan; Simon Dixon
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  Valuing Meta-Health Effects for Use in Economic Evaluations to Inform Reimbursement Decisions: A Review of the Evidence.

Authors:  Richard De Abreu Lourenco; Marion Haas; Jane Hall; Rosalie Viney
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Capturing disutility from waiting time.

Authors:  Afschin Gandjour
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Preferences for surveillance strategies for women treated for high-grade precancerous cervical lesions.

Authors:  M Kuppermann; J Melnikow; C Slee; D J Tancredi; S Kulasingam; S Birch; L J Helms; A M Bayoumi; G F Sawaya
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2010-08-01       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 6.  Conceptualising 'Benefits Beyond Health' in the Context of the Quality-Adjusted Life-Year: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis.

Authors:  Lidia Engel; Stirling Bryan; David G T Whitehurst
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2021-08-23       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Quality of life valuations of HPV-associated cancer health states by the general population.

Authors:  E Lynne Conway; K Chip Farmer; William J Lynch; Guy L Rees; Gerard Wain; Jane Adams
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 3.519

8.  Estimation of utility weights for human papilloma virus-related health states according to disease severity.

Authors:  Minsu Ock; Jeong-Yeol Park; Woo-Seung Son; Hyeon-Jeong Lee; Seon-Ha Kim; Min-Woo Jo
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 3.186

9.  Economic evaluation of process utility: elucidating preferences for a non-invasive procedure to treat restenosis.

Authors:  Maria V Aviles-Blanco
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2021-07-23

10.  A survey of population-based utility scores for cervical cancer prevention.

Authors:  Leonardo Simonella; Kirsten Howard; Karen Canfell
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2014-12-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.