Literature DB >> 8634617

Costs and cost effectiveness of cardiovascular screening and intervention: the British family heart study.

D Wonderling1, C McDermott, M Buxton, A L Kinmonth, S Pyke, S Thompson, D Wood.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To measure costs and cost effectiveness of the British family heart study cardiovascular screening and intervention programme.
DESIGN: Cost effectiveness analysis of randomised controlled trial. Clinical and resource use data taken from trial and unit cost data from external estimates.
SETTING: 13 general practices across Britain.
SUBJECTS: 4185 men aged 40-59 and their 2827 partners. INTERVENTION: Nurse led programme using a family centered approach, with follow up according to degree of risk. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost of the programme it self; overall short term cost to NHS; cost per 1% reduction in coronary risk at one year.
RESULTS: Estimated cost of putting the programme into practice for one year was 63 pounds per person (95% confidence interval 60 pounds to 65 pounds). The overall short term cost to the health service was 77 pounds per man (29 pounds to 124 pounds) but only 13 pounds per woman (-48 pounds to 74 pounds), owing to differences in utilisation of other health service resources. The cost per 1% reduction in risk was 5.08 pounds per man (5.92 pounds including broader health service costs) and 5.78 pounds per woman (1.28 pounds taking into account wider health service savings).
CONCLUSIONS: The direct cost of the programme to a four partner practice of 7500 patients would be approximately 58,000 pounds. Annually, 8300 pounds would currently be paid to a practice of this size working to the maximum target on the health promotion bands, plus any additional reimbursement of practice staff salaries for which the practice qualified. The broader short term costs to the NHS may augment these costs for men but offset them considerably for women.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8634617      PMCID: PMC2351101          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.312.7041.1269

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  5 in total

1.  Meta-analysis in clinical trials.

Authors:  R DerSimonian; N Laird
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1986-09

2.  Mammography screening: an incremental cost effectiveness analysis of two view versus one view procedures in London.

Authors:  S Bryan; J Brown; R Warren
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 3.710

3.  The Dundee coronary risk-disk for management of change in risk factors.

Authors:  H Tunstall-Pedoe
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-09-28

4.  Costs and cost effectiveness of health checks conducted by nurses in primary care: the Oxcheck study.

Authors:  S Langham; M Thorogood; C Normand; J Muir; L Jones; G Fowler
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-05-18

5.  What can be concluded from the Oxcheck and British family heart studies: commentary on cost effectiveness analyses.

Authors:  D Wonderling; S Langham; M Buxton; C Normand; C McDermott
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-05-18
  5 in total
  15 in total

Review 1.  Families of patients with premature coronary heart disease: an obvious but neglected target for primary prevention.

Authors:  C K Chow; A C H Pell; A Walker; C O'Dowd; A F Dominiczak; J P Pell
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-09-08

2.  Cost effectiveness of nurse led secondary prevention clinics for coronary heart disease in primary care: follow up of a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  James P Raftery; Guiqing L Yao; Peter Murchie; Neil C Campbell; Lewis D Ritchie
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-02-16

3.  Secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in primary care is cost effective.

Authors:  A McKnight; M Cupples
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-08-31

4.  The cost-effectiveness of lipid lowering in patients with ischaemic heart disease: an intervention and evaluation in primary care.

Authors:  J Hippisley-Cox; M Pringle
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Lifestyle modifications to prevent and control hypertension. 1. Methods and an overview of the Canadian recommendations. Canadian Hypertension Society, Canadian Coalition for High Blood Pressure Prevention and Control, Laboratory Centre for Disease Control at Health Canada, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada.

Authors:  N R Campbell; E Burgess; B C Choi; G Taylor; E Wilson; J Cléroux; J G Fodor; L A Leiter; D Spence
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1999-05-04       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Who is targeted for lifestyle advice? A cross-sectional survey in two general practices.

Authors:  P Little; L Slocock; S Griffin; J Pillinger
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 7.  Economic evaluation of cholesterol-related interventions in general practice. An appraisal of the evidence.

Authors:  T van der Weijden; J A Knottnerus; A J Ament; H E Stoffers; R P Grol
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 8.  Simvastatin. A reappraisal of its cost effectiveness in dyslipidaemia and coronary heart disease.

Authors:  K L Goa; L B Barradell; D McTavish
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Costs and cost effectiveness of health checks conducted by nurses in primary care: the Oxcheck study.

Authors:  S Langham; M Thorogood; C Normand; J Muir; L Jones; G Fowler
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-05-18

10.  What can be concluded from the Oxcheck and British family heart studies: commentary on cost effectiveness analyses.

Authors:  D Wonderling; S Langham; M Buxton; C Normand; C McDermott
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-05-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.