Sexually transmitted diseases · 2002
An economic evaluation of a school-based sexually transmitted disease screening program.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wang Li Yan, Burstein Gale R, Cohen Deborah A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: A school-based sexually transmitted disease (STD) screening program was implemented in eight New Orleans public high schools to detect chlamydia and gonorrhea.
GOAL: The goal was to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness of replacing non-school-based screening with the school-based screening program.
STUDY DESIGN: A decision-analysis model was constructed to compare costs and cases of expected pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) in the school-based screening scenario versus a non-school-based screening scenario. Cost-effectiveness was quantified and measured as cost per case of PID prevented.
RESULTS: Under base-case assumptions, at an intervention cost of $86,449, the school screening program prevented an estimated 38 cases of PID, as well as $119,866 in treatment costs for PID and its sequelae, resulting in savings of $1524 per case of PID prevented. Results remained cost-saving over a reasonable range of model parameter estimates.
CONCLUSIONS: The New Orleans school-based chlamydia screening program was cost-effective and cost-saving and could be cost-effective in other settings. School-based screening programs of this type are likely to be a cost-effective use of public funds and can reduce the burden of STDs among adolescents.
GOAL: The goal was to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness of replacing non-school-based screening with the school-based screening program.
STUDY DESIGN: A decision-analysis model was constructed to compare costs and cases of expected pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) in the school-based screening scenario versus a non-school-based screening scenario. Cost-effectiveness was quantified and measured as cost per case of PID prevented.
RESULTS: Under base-case assumptions, at an intervention cost of $86,449, the school screening program prevented an estimated 38 cases of PID, as well as $119,866 in treatment costs for PID and its sequelae, resulting in savings of $1524 per case of PID prevented. Results remained cost-saving over a reasonable range of model parameter estimates.
CONCLUSIONS: The New Orleans school-based chlamydia screening program was cost-effective and cost-saving and could be cost-effective in other settings. School-based screening programs of this type are likely to be a cost-effective use of public funds and can reduce the burden of STDs among adolescents.