David R Lairson1, Yu-Chia Chang2, Theresa L Byrd3, Judith Lee Smith4, Maria E Fernandez5, Katherine M Wilson6. 1. School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: david.r.lairson@uth.tmc.edu. 2. School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas. 3. Paul L. Foster School of Medicine, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas. 4. CDC, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Atlanta, Georgia. 5. School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas; Center for Health Promotion and Prevention Research, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas. 6. Epidemiology and Analysis Program Office, Atlanta, Georgia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hispanic women have a higher incidence of cervical cancer than all other races and ethnicities. In Hispanic subgroups, Mexican American women were among the least likely to have received cervical cancer screening. In a recent RCT, Ayudando a las Mujeres con Información, Guia, y Amor para su Salud (AMIGAS) was shown to increase cervical cancer screening rates among women of Mexican descent at 6 months in all intervention arms compared to the control arm. Limited information exists about the economics of interventions to increase cervical cancer screening rates among women of Mexican descent. PURPOSE: This study aims to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the alternative AMIGAS intervention methods for increasing cervical cancer screening among low-income women of Mexican descent in three U.S. communities. METHODS: Cost data were collected from 2008 to 2011 alongside the AMIGAS study of 613 women. Receipt of Pap test within 6 months of intervention was the primary outcome measure in the cost-effectiveness analysis, conducted during 2012-2013. RESULTS: The cost per additional woman screened comparing the video-only intervention to usual care was $980. The cost increased to $1,309 with participant time cost included. With an additional cost per participant of $3.90 compared to flipchart only, the full AMIGAS program (video plus flipchart) yielded 6.8% additional women screened. CONCLUSIONS: Results on the average and incremental cost-effectiveness of the AMIGAS program elements may assist health policymakers and program managers to select and appropriately budget for interventions shown to increase cervical cancer screening among low-income women of Mexican descent.
BACKGROUND: Hispanic women have a higher incidence of cervical cancer than all other races and ethnicities. In Hispanic subgroups, Mexican American women were among the least likely to have received cervical cancer screening. In a recent RCT, Ayudando a las Mujeres con Información, Guia, y Amor para su Salud (AMIGAS) was shown to increase cervical cancer screening rates among women of Mexican descent at 6 months in all intervention arms compared to the control arm. Limited information exists about the economics of interventions to increase cervical cancer screening rates among women of Mexican descent. PURPOSE: This study aims to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the alternative AMIGAS intervention methods for increasing cervical cancer screening among low-income women of Mexican descent in three U.S. communities. METHODS: Cost data were collected from 2008 to 2011 alongside the AMIGAS study of 613 women. Receipt of Pap test within 6 months of intervention was the primary outcome measure in the cost-effectiveness analysis, conducted during 2012-2013. RESULTS: The cost per additional woman screened comparing the video-only intervention to usual care was $980. The cost increased to $1,309 with participant time cost included. With an additional cost per participant of $3.90 compared to flipchart only, the full AMIGAS program (video plus flipchart) yielded 6.8% additional women screened. CONCLUSIONS: Results on the average and incremental cost-effectiveness of the AMIGAS program elements may assist health policymakers and program managers to select and appropriately budget for interventions shown to increase cervical cancer screening among low-income women of Mexican descent.
Authors: M van Ballegooijen; E van den Akker-van Marle; J Patnick; E Lynge; M Arbyn; A Anttila; G Ronco; J Dik; F Habbema Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Theresa L Byrd; Katherine M Wilson; Judith Lee Smith; Andrea Heckert; Carlyn E Orians; Sally W Vernon; Maria E Fernandez-Esquer; Maria E Fernandez Journal: Health Educ Behav Date: 2012-03-01
Authors: Arturo Vargas Bustamante; Jie Chen; Hector P Rodriguez; John A Rizzo; Alexander N Ortega Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Susan A Sabatino; Briana Lawrence; Randy Elder; Shawna L Mercer; Katherine M Wilson; Barbara DeVinney; Stephanie Melillo; Michelle Carvalho; Stephen Taplin; Roshan Bastani; Barbara K Rimer; Sally W Vernon; Cathy Lee Melvin; Vicky Taylor; Maria Fernandez; Karen Glanz Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Linda K Larkey; Patricia M Herman; Denise J Roe; Francisco Garcia; A M Lopez; J Gonzalez; Prasadini N Perera; Kathylynn Saboda Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2012-03-14 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Theresa L Byrd; Katherine M Wilson; Judith Lee Smith; Gloria Coronado; Sally W Vernon; Maria Eugenia Fernandez-Esquer; Beti Thompson; Melchor Ortiz; David Lairson; Maria E Fernandez Journal: Cancer Date: 2012-12-21 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Kyounghae Kim; Janet S Choi; Eunsuk Choi; Carrie L Nieman; Jin Hui Joo; Frank R Lin; Laura N Gitlin; Hae-Ra Han Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2016-02-18 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Giridhar Mohan; Sajal K Chattopadhyay; Donatus U Ekwueme; Susan A Sabatino; Devon L Okasako-Schmucker; Yinan Peng; Shawna L Mercer; Anilkrishna B Thota Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2019-08-30 Impact factor: 5.043