IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/58109.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Exploring the cost-effectiveness of a one-off screen for dementia (for people aged 75 years in England and Wales)

Author

Listed:
  • Dixon, Josie
  • Ferdinand, Monique
  • D'Amico, Francesco
  • Knapp, Martin

Abstract

Objective: This paper examines the numbers of people with dementia who could be diagnosed and the likely cost-effectiveness of a one-off screen for dementia for people aged 75 years in England and Wales. Methods: The study uses static decision modelling to compare a one-off screen for dementia with a no-screen scenario. Estimates for the model were drawn from systematic reviews, high-quality studies and government and administrative sources. A panel of experts also advised the study. Results: An estimated 3514 people could be diagnosed as a result of screening, 2152 of whom would otherwise never receive a diagnosis. The study identified societal economic impact of between £3 649 794 (net costs) and £4 685 768 (net savings), depending on assumptions. Conclusions: Our analysis suggests that screening could be cost-effective, especially as treatments and social care interventions become more effective and if diagnosis by current routes remains low or occurs later than is optimal. This study was, however, limited by available evidence and a range of quality of life benefits, cost savings and potential harms could not be quantified. It was also beyond the scope of this study to consider dynamic factors such as repeat screening, mortality, disease trajectories or trends in the numbers of people with dementia. A larger study would be needed for this, involving more complex and innovative approaches to generating estimates for modelling. We did not compare population screening for people aged 75 years to other methods for increasing diagnosis rates.

Suggested Citation

  • Dixon, Josie & Ferdinand, Monique & D'Amico, Francesco & Knapp, Martin, 2015. "Exploring the cost-effectiveness of a one-off screen for dementia (for people aged 75 years in England and Wales)," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 58109, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:58109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/58109/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Denis Getsios & Kristen Migliaccio-Walle & Jaime Caro, 2007. "NICE Cost-Effectiveness Appraisal of Cholinesterase Inhibitors," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 25(12), pages 997-1006, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Denis Getsios & Steve Blume & K. Ishak & Grant Maclaine, 2010. "Cost Effectiveness of Donepezil in the Treatment of Mild to Moderate Alzheimer’s Disease," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 28(5), pages 411-427, May.
    2. Eric Stallard & Bruce Kinosian & Arthur S. Zbrozek & Anatoliy I. Yashin & Henry A. Glick & Yaakov Stern, 2010. "Estimation and Validation of a Multiattribute Model of Alzheimer Disease Progression," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(6), pages 625-638, November.
    3. Jacques Touchon & Jean Lachaine & Catherine Beauchemin & Anna Granghaud & Benoit Rive & Sébastien Bineau, 2014. "The impact of memantine in combination with acetylcholinesterase inhibitors on admission of patients with Alzheimer’s disease to nursing homes: cost-effectiveness analysis in France," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(8), pages 791-800, November.
    4. Kristin Kahle-Wrobleski & Howard Fillit & Jonathan Kurlander & Catherine Reed & Mark Belger, 2015. "Methodological challenges in assessing the impact of comorbidities on costs in Alzheimer’s disease clinical trials," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(9), pages 995-1004, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    dementia; diagnosis; screening; care; cost-effectiveness;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ehl:lserod:58109. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    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.