International angiology : a journal of the International Union of Angiology · 2016
Revisiting the cost-effectiveness of screening 65-year-old men for abdominal aortic aneurysm based on data from an implemented screening programme.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Hager Jakob, Henriksson Martin, Carlsson Per, Länne Toste, Lundgren Fredrik
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Health economic analyses based on randomized trials have shown that screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) cost-effectively decreases AAA-related, as well as all- cause mortality. However, follow-up from implemented screening programmes now reveal substantially changed conditions in terms of prevalence, attendance rate, costs and mortality after intervention. Our aim was to evaluate whether screening for AAA among 65-year-old men is cost-effective based on contemporary data on prevalence and attendance rates from an ongoing AAA screening programme.
METHODS: A decision-analytic model, previously used to analyse the cost-effectiveness of an AAA screening programme prior to implementation in clinical practice, was updated using data collected from an implemented screening programme as well as data from contemporary published data and the Swedish register for vascular surgery (Swedvasc).
RESULTS: The base-case analysis showed that the cost per life-year gained and quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained were €4832 and €6325, respectively. Based on conventional threshold values of cost-effectiveness, the probability of screening being cost-effective was high.
CONCLUSION: Despite the reduction of AAA-prevalence and changes in AAA-management over time, screening 65-year-old men for AAA still appears to yield health outcomes at a cost below conventional thresholds of cost-effectiveness.
METHODS: A decision-analytic model, previously used to analyse the cost-effectiveness of an AAA screening programme prior to implementation in clinical practice, was updated using data collected from an implemented screening programme as well as data from contemporary published data and the Swedish register for vascular surgery (Swedvasc).
RESULTS: The base-case analysis showed that the cost per life-year gained and quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained were €4832 and €6325, respectively. Based on conventional threshold values of cost-effectiveness, the probability of screening being cost-effective was high.
CONCLUSION: Despite the reduction of AAA-prevalence and changes in AAA-management over time, screening 65-year-old men for AAA still appears to yield health outcomes at a cost below conventional thresholds of cost-effectiveness.