IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v30y1990i10p1081-1087.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic aspects of cervical cancer screening

Author

Listed:
  • Koopmanschap, Marc A.
  • Lubbe, Koos Th. N.
  • van Oortmarssen, Gerrit J.
  • van Agt, Heleen M. A.
  • van Ballegooijen, Marjolein
  • Habbema, J. Dik F.

Abstract

The results of a cost-effectiveness analysis of cervical cancer screening in The Netherlands are reported, emphasizing the analysis of the costs of screening and consequent diagnosis and treatment. Many organized screening policies are evaluated, differing in age-range and interval between screens. The cost estimates are based on organization charts, file studies and tariffs. The costs of screening itself are by far the most important cost component. Screening increases the costs of diagnosis. Costs for primary treatment only rise for large screening policies. Screening causes savings in costs of terminal treatment, but these are small compared with the costs of screening. The costs per life-year gained for the most efficient policies amount to DFL 24,000 for the policy with 7 invitations per woman in a lifetime and rise considerably in case of more than 10 invitations. Cervical cancer screening appears to be less cost-effective than breast cancer screening, but compared with other services the results are comparatively good. Implementing one of the efficient organized screening policies and discouraging spontaneous screening beyond that schedule leads to considerable savings. Moreover, many organized policies which are not efficient are still superior to spontaneous screening.

Suggested Citation

  • Koopmanschap, Marc A. & Lubbe, Koos Th. N. & van Oortmarssen, Gerrit J. & van Agt, Heleen M. A. & van Ballegooijen, Marjolein & Habbema, J. Dik F., 1990. "Economic aspects of cervical cancer screening," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 30(10), pages 1081-1087, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:30:y:1990:i:10:p:1081-1087
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(90)90294-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Natasha Stout & Amy Knudsen & Chung Kong & Pamela McMahon & G. Gazelle, 2009. "Calibration Methods Used in Cancer Simulation Models and Suggested Reporting Guidelines," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 27(7), pages 533-545, July.
    2. John Cairns & Phil Shackley, 1993. "Sometimes sensitive, seldom specific: A review of the economics of screening," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 2(1), pages 43-53, April.
    3. Dorte Gyrd‐Hansen & Jes Søgaard, 2001. "Analysing public preferences for cancer screening programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(7), pages 617-634, October.
    4. Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte & Holund, Berit & Andersen, Per, 1995. "A cost-effectiveness analysis of cervical cancer screening: health policy implications," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 35-51, October.
    5. Marc A. Koopmanschap & Frans F. H. Rutten, 1994. "The impact of indirect costs on outcomes of health care programs," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 3(6), pages 385-393, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:30:y:1990:i:10:p:1081-1087. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.