American journal of public health · 1997
The costs and effects of cervical and breast cancer screening in a public hospital emergency room. The Cancer Control Center of Harlem.
СтатьяПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание 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.
Mandelblatt J, Freeman H, Winczewski D, Cagney K, Williams S, Trowers R, Tang J, Gold K, Lin T H, Kerner J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of cervix and breast cancer screening in a public hospital emergency room.
METHODS: Age-eligible women with nonurgent conditions and without recent screening were offered screening by a nurse. A decision analysis compared the costs and outcomes of emergency room screening and standard hospital screening efforts.
RESULTS: The undiscounted cost-effectiveness results for establishing new programs were $4050 (cervical cancer), $403,203 (breast cancer), and $4375 (joint cervix and breast cancer) per year of life saved. If screening is added to an existing program, results are more favorable ($429, $21,324, and $479 per year of life saved for cervix, breast, and joint screening, respectively). Results were most sensitive to volume and probability of receiving treatment after an abnormal screen.
CONCLUSIONS: Emergency room screening was cost-effective for cervical cancer; breast cancer screening was relatively expensive given the low number of women reached. More intensive recruitment and follow-up strategies are needed to maximize the cost-effectiveness of such programs.
METHODS: Age-eligible women with nonurgent conditions and without recent screening were offered screening by a nurse. A decision analysis compared the costs and outcomes of emergency room screening and standard hospital screening efforts.
RESULTS: The undiscounted cost-effectiveness results for establishing new programs were $4050 (cervical cancer), $403,203 (breast cancer), and $4375 (joint cervix and breast cancer) per year of life saved. If screening is added to an existing program, results are more favorable ($429, $21,324, and $479 per year of life saved for cervix, breast, and joint screening, respectively). Results were most sensitive to volume and probability of receiving treatment after an abnormal screen.
CONCLUSIONS: Emergency room screening was cost-effective for cervical cancer; breast cancer screening was relatively expensive given the low number of women reached. More intensive recruitment and follow-up strategies are needed to maximize the cost-effectiveness of such programs.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Breast NeoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision TreesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHospitals, PublicHumansIncidenceLife ExpectancyMammographyMass ScreeningMedical IndigencyProbabilitySEER ProgramSurvival AnalysisUnited StatesUrban PopulationUterine Cervical NeoplasmsVaginal Smears