OBJECTIVES: To estimate and to compare the cost per woman examined and per breast cancer detected in two mammographic screening programmes in the province of Florence. SETTING: Two ongoing, population based, mammographic screening programmes in the province of Florence. The first (district project) was started in the seventies in a rural area, whereas the second (city project) was started in the city at the end of 1990. METHODS: All relevant resources consumed by the programmes (costs) were listed and measured. The costs are related to 1993. The unit cost for each phase (recruitment, screening, assessment) of the screening process was estimated by dividing the total cost of the phase by the number of women examined. The cost per cancer detected was obtained by dividing the total cost of the programme by the number of cancers detected at screening. RESULTS: The costs per woman examined were $38.1 and $41.1 in the district and city programmes respectively. The cost per breast cancer detected was $7424 in the district programme and $5180 in the city programme. Staff accounted for more than 50% of the total cost. The unit cost in the screening phase was higher in the district programme, whereas it was lower in the assessment phase. CONCLUSIONS: Our results are consistent with, although slightly lower than, published estimates of the cost per woman screened. Important parameters for determining the efficiency of a mammographic screening programme are the compliance rate and the recall rate.
OBJECTIVES: To estimate and to compare the cost per woman examined and per breast cancer detected in two mammographic screening programmes in the province of Florence. SETTING: Two ongoing, population based, mammographic screening programmes in the province of Florence. The first (district project) was started in the seventies in a rural area, whereas the second (city project) was started in the city at the end of 1990. METHODS: All relevant resources consumed by the programmes (costs) were listed and measured. The costs are related to 1993. The unit cost for each phase (recruitment, screening, assessment) of the screening process was estimated by dividing the total cost of the phase by the number of women examined. The cost per cancer detected was obtained by dividing the total cost of the programme by the number of cancers detected at screening. RESULTS: The costs per woman examined were $38.1 and $41.1 in the district and city programmes respectively. The cost per breast cancer detected was $7424 in the district programme and $5180 in the city programme. Staff accounted for more than 50% of the total cost. The unit cost in the screening phase was higher in the district programme, whereas it was lower in the assessment phase. CONCLUSIONS: Our results are consistent with, although slightly lower than, published estimates of the cost per woman screened. Important parameters for determining the efficiency of a mammographic screening programme are the compliance rate and the recall rate.