Cost-effectiveness of strategies to increase screening coverage for cervical cancer in Spain: the CRIVERVA study

dc.contributor.author
Trapero Bertran, Marta
dc.contributor.author
Acera Pérez, Amèlia
dc.contributor.author
Sanjosé Llongueras, Silvia de
dc.contributor.author
Manresa Domínguez, Josep Maria
dc.contributor.author
Rodríguez Capriles, Diego
dc.contributor.author
Ana Rodriguez Martinez, Ana
dc.contributor.author
Bonet Simó, Josep Maria
dc.contributor.author
Sanchez Sanchez, Norman
dc.contributor.author
Hidalgo Valls, Pablo
dc.contributor.author
Diaz Sanchis, Mireia
dc.date.issued
2018-09-12T11:48:15Z
dc.date.issued
2018-09-12T11:48:15Z
dc.date.issued
2017-02-14
dc.date.issued
2018-07-24T12:10:49Z
dc.identifier
https://hdl.handle.net/2445/124483
dc.identifier
28196467
dc.description.abstract
Background: The aim of the study is to carry out a cost-effectiveness analysis of three different interventions to promote the uptake of screening for cervical cancer in general practice in the county of Valles Occidental, Barcelona, Spain. Methods: Women aged from 30 to 70 years (n = 15,965) were asked to attend a general practice to be screened. They were randomly allocated to one of four groups: no intervention group (NIG); one group where women received an invitation letter to participate in the screening (IG1); one group where women received an invitation letter and informative leaflet (IG2); and one group where women received an invitation letter, an informative leaflet and a phone call reminder (IG3). Clinical effectiveness was measured as the percentage increase in screening coverage. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the perspective of the public health system with a time horizon of three to five years - the duration of the randomised controlled clinical trial. In addition, a deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed. Results are presented according to different age groups. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the most cost-effective intervention, IG1, compared with opportunistic screening was (sic)2.78 per 1% increase in the screening coverage. The age interval with the worst results in terms of efficiency was women aged < 40 years. Conclusions: In a population like Catalonia, with around 2 million women aged 30 to 70 years and assuming that 40% of these women were not attending general practice to be screened for cervical cancer, the implementation of an intervention to increase screening coverage which consists of sending a letter would cost on average less than (sic)490 for every 1000 women.
dc.format
8 p.
dc.format
application/pdf
dc.language
eng
dc.publisher
BioMed Central
dc.relation
Reproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4115-0
dc.relation
BMC Public Health, 2017, vol. 17, num. 194
dc.relation
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4115-0
dc.relation
info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/FP7/603019/EU//COHEAHR
dc.rights
cc by (c) Trapero Bertran et al., 2017
dc.rights
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/
dc.rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.source
Articles publicats en revistes (Institut d'lnvestigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL))
dc.subject
Càncer de coll uterí
dc.subject
Anàlisi cost-benefici
dc.subject
Cervix cancer
dc.subject
Cost effectiveness
dc.title
Cost-effectiveness of strategies to increase screening coverage for cervical cancer in Spain: the CRIVERVA study
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.