PuSH - Publikationsserver des Helmholtz Zentrums München

de Wit, G.A.* ; Over, E.A.* ; Schmid, B.V.* ; van Bergen, J.E.* ; van den Broek, I.V.* ; van der Sande, M.A.* ; Welte, R. ; Op de Coul, E.L.* ; Kretzschmar, M.E.*

Chlamydia screening is not cost-effective at low participation rates: Evidence from a repeated register-based implementation study in the Netherlands.

Sex. Transm. Dis. 91, 423-429 (2015)
DOI PMC
Open Access Green möglich sobald Postprint bei der ZB eingereicht worden ist.
OBJECTIVE: In three pilot regions of the Netherlands, all 16-29 year olds were invited to participate in three annual rounds of Chlamydia screening. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of repeated Chlamydia screening, based on empirical data. METHODS: A mathematical model was employed to estimate the influence of repeated screening on prevalence and incidence of Chlamydial infection. A model simulating the natural history of Chlamydia was combined with cost and utility data to estimate the number of major outcomes and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with Chlamydia. Six screening scenarios (16-29 years annually; 16-24 years annually; women only; biennial screening; biennial screening women only; screening every five years) were compared with no screening in two sexual networks, representing both lower ('national network') and higher ('urban network') baseline prevalence. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for the different screening scenarios were estimated. Uncertainty and sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: In all scenarios and networks, cost per major outcome averted are above €5000. Cost per QALY are at least €50 000. The default scenario as piloted in the Netherlands was least cost-effective, with ICERs of €232 000 in the national and €145 000 in the urban sexual network. Results were robust in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: It is unlikely that repeated rounds of Chlamydia screening will be cost-effective. Only at high levels of willingness to pay for a QALY (>€50 000) screening may be more cost-effective than no screening.
Altmetric
Weitere Metriken?
Zusatzinfos bearbeiten [➜Einloggen]
Publikationstyp Artikel: Journalartikel
Dokumenttyp Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
Schlagwörter Chlamydia Trachomatis ; Cost-effectiveness ; Mathematical Model ; Screening; Trachomatis Infections; Economic Evaluations; Controlled-trial; Programs; Disease
ISSN (print) / ISBN 0148-5717
e-ISSN 1537-4521
Quellenangaben Band: 91, Heft: 6, Seiten: 423-429 Artikelnummer: , Supplement: ,
Verlag Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Verlagsort London
Begutachtungsstatus Peer reviewed