Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Screening”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,621 records · Page 90Linked to original sources
PubMed2002

Marginal decrease in mortality and marked increase in incidence as a result of neuroblastoma screening at 6 months of age: cohort study in seven prefectures in Japan.

PURPOSE: To determine the usefulness of 6-month screening for neuroblastoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The cumulative incidence rates (IRs) and cumulative mortality rates (MRs) of neuroblastoma in children younger than 60 months of age were analyzed for control (n = 713,025), qualitative screening (Qual Screen, n = 1,142,519), and quantitative screening (Quan Screen, n = 550,331) cohorts, and for Screened and Unscreened subgroups within screening cohorts. RESULTS: IRs (per 100,000) for infants aged 6 to 11 months were 1.12 in Control, 5.69 in Qual Screen (P <.0001), and 17.81 in Quan Screen (P <.0001); IRs for children aged 12 to 59 months were 7.29 in Control, 5.86 in Qual Screen (P =.28), and 6.36 in Quan Screen (P =.60). IRs for children aged 12 to 59 months in Unscreened or Screened subgroups remained at the same level. When patients diagnosed at younger than 6 months of age were excluded, the MR (per 100,000) under 60 months for Control was 4.21; those in Unscreened and Screened subgroups were 3.84 and 2.53 in Qual Screen (P =.30), and 3.20 and 1.97 in Quan Screen (P =.73), respectively; MRs between Control and Unscreened subgroups revealed no significant differences (P =.89 in Qual Screen, P =.85 in Quan Screen). CONCLUSION: Six-month screening resulted in a marked increase in incidence for infants with no significant decrease in incidence for children older than 1 year of age. A decrease in mortality was observed, but it was not significant. The usefulness of screening is questionable, because the decrease of mortality should be balanced against the adverse effect of overdiagnosis and the psychological burden on parents and children.

Age Factors↗
PubMed2003

The impact of screening on future health-promoting behaviours and health beliefs: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To carry out a systematic review to examine the effects of cholesterol, breast and cervical cancer screening on actual or intended health-promoting behaviours and health-related beliefs. DATA SOURCES: Eleven electronic databases (between 1980 and 2000). REVIEW METHODS: All English language studies that investigated the impact of cholesterol, breast and cervical screening programmes on health-promoting behaviours and beliefs were assessed for inclusion. The data extraction form and quality assessment criteria were developed using the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidelines. Data were extracted and a non-quantitative synthesis was conducted. Reviewers categorised the outcomes into those that could be considered beneficial or detrimental to health. This categorisation was based on a value judgement that considered both statistical and clinical significance. RESULTS: The cholesterol studies used prospective designs more frequently, possibly as many focused on observing changes in lifestyle following screening. Participants who went for breast or cervical screening were not offered advice on lifestyle changes and most of the research into cancer screening programmes investigated issues related to uptake of screening services, explanations of why people are or are not screened and interventions to improve uptake. All three screening programmes are associated with high levels of favourable health behaviours and beliefs that have been measured, although there is evidence that recommended follow-up after screening is often not adhered to. There was no literature on the cost-effectiveness regarding the wider implications of screening (only on reduction of disease-specific mortality/morbidity), possibly due to the outcomes being very broad and not easily categorised and classified. CONCLUSIONS: The studies reviewed suggest that cholesterol screening had a positive effect on health behaviours, although participation was voluntary and those screened were possibly more motivated to make changes. These results are therefore not generalisable to the entire population and other factors need to be taken into account. Reduction in blood cholesterol levels was reported in all but two of the studies that assessed this outcome, suggesting that successful lifestyle changes were made. However, as most of the studies only reported follow-up of those screened, some of the reduction can be attributable to regression to the mean. Whether breast and cervical screening affect future health behaviours and beliefs has not been directly measured in many studies and few studies have collected baseline measures. However, evidence suggests that women who attend breast and cervical screening once are likely to reattend and attendance is associated with several positive health behaviours, although it cannot be confirmed whether the associations observed were a result of screening or because these women have a certain set of health behaviours and beliefs irrespective of their experience of screening. Areas of further research include: measuring a much wider range of behaviours and beliefs before and after screening is accepted or declined, examining the subgroup of participants who receive 'desirable' results and the impact of this on health beliefs and health-promoting behaviour, and qualitative research into the experiences of screening and how this interacts with knowledge and beliefs about other aspects of health.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2001

The characteristics of screened patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm.

BACKGROUND: Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has not yet been established in Japan. We therefore report the characteristics of a screened population and discuss the implications of screening using ultrasound in Japan. METHODS: The subjects in our screening group were composed of 4428 participants who were 60 years of age or older. Aneurysm was detected in 16 cases, 15 males and 1 female, the detection rate being 0.4% in total and 0.9% in the males. We compare the characteristics of screened patients (n = 16) with non-screened patients operated on for abdominal aortic aneurysm (n = 166). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the mean age or in the female ratio between the screened and non-screened groups (71 vs 70 y/o, 6% vs 13%, respectively). Solitary iliac aneurysms were significantly (p < 0.05) more frequent in the screened than in the non-screened group (19% vs 3%). The size of aneurysm in the screened group was significantly (p < 0.05) smaller compared with the non-screened group. Sixty-three per cent of the screened group and only 8% of the non-screened group had an aneurysm less than 40 mm in size. Aneurysm was palpable in only 31% of those of the screened group. There were no significant differences between the groups in the frequency of arteriosclerotic risk factors such as hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease and smoking habits. Surgical treatment was selected in 7 out of 16 screened patients. The remaining 9 patients with small-sized abdominal aortic aneurysms have been carefully followed up. CONCLUSIONS: Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm using ultrasound is advisable especially for male participants and for the detection of iliac aneurysms. This screening procedure is useful for early detection because the screened aneurysm is generally small-sized and impalpable.

Aged↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Patient report of HIV risk screening by primary care physicians.

Our objectives were to (1) assess primary care physicians' performance at screening patients for HIV risks using patient report; (2) compare patient recall concerning screening with physician report; and (3) compare HIV risk screening with general preventive health screening. Up to 20 patients from 126 physicians' practices anonymously completed 1,820 questionnaires. Questionnaires assessed screening from physicians about HIV risks and general preventive health care. Two scales were developed to measure comprehensiveness of screening. Based on patient recall, physicians performed poorly in HIV risk screening. On an HIV risk-screening scale, patients were screened concerning 11% of items assessed. In comparison, patients recalled screening concerning 75% of general prevention items assessed. Patients with acknowledged HIV risk factors and younger patients were screened more for HIV risk, but many patients with risks were still missed. Physicians' estimates of their screening were relatively concordant with patient report in general prevention areas but were discordant with patient recall of HIV risk screening; physicians estimated considerably more screening than their patients recalled. Female physicians performed better than male physicians in both HIV risk screening and general preventive health screening; physicians with more HIV experience performed better at HIV risk screening. HIV risk screening in the primary care setting remains inadequate. Comparable attention to that given to general prevention by primary care physicians is needed in screening patients for HIV risk behaviors.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1998

Heuristic lipophilicity potential for computer-aided rational drug design: optimizations of screening functions and parameters.

In this research we test and compare three possible atom-based screening functions used in the heuristic molecular lipophilicity potential (HMLP). Screening function 1 is a power distance-dependent function, bi/[formula: see text] Ri-r [formula: see text] gamma, screening function 2 is an exponential distance-dependent function, bi exp(-[formula: see text] Ri-r [formula: see text]/d0), and screening function 3 is a weighted distance-dependent function, sign(bi) exp[-xi [formula: see text] Ri-r [formula: see text]/magnitude of bi)]. For every screening function, the parameters (gamma, d0, and xi) are optimized using 41 common organic molecules of 4 types of compounds: aliphatic alcohols, aliphatic carboxylic acids, aliphatic amines, and aliphatic alkanes. The results of calculations show that screening function 3 cannot give chemically reasonable results, however, both the power screening function and the exponential screening function give chemically satisfactory results. There are two notable differences between screening functions 1 and 2. First, the exponential screening function has larger values in the short distance than the power screening function, therefore more influence from the nearest neighbors is involved using screening function 2 than screening function 1. Second, the power screening function has larger values in the long distance than the exponential screening function, therefore screening function 1 is effected by atoms at long distance more than screening function 2. For screening function 1, the suitable range of parameter gamma is 1.0 < gamma < 3.0, gamma = 2.3 is recommended, and gamma = 2.0 is the nearest integral value. For screening function 2, the suitable range of parameter d0 is 1.5 < d0 < 3.0, and d0 = 2.0 is recommended. HMLP developed in this research provides a potential tool for computer-aided three-dimensional drug design.

Computer-Aided Design↗
PubMed1998

Cost-effectiveness analysis of lead poisoning screening strategies following the 1997 guidelines of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

OBJECTIVE: To compare blood lead (BPb) poisoning screening strategies in light of the 1997 recommendations by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Ga. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the health care system to compare the following 4 screening strategies: (1) universal screening of venous BPb levels; (2) universal screening of capillary BPb levels; (3) targeted screening of venous BPb levels for those at risk; and (4) targeted screening of capillary BPb levels for those at risk. Costs of follow-up testing and treatment were included in the model. RESULTS: Only universal venous screening detected all BPb levels of at least 0.48 micromol/L (10 microg/dL). Universal capillary screening detected between 93.2% and 95.5% of cases, depending on the prevalence of elevated BPb levels. Targeted screening was the least sensitive strategy for detecting cases. Venous testing identified between 77.3% and 77.9% of cases, and capillary testing detected between 72.7% and 72.8% of cases. In high-prevalence populations, universal venous screening minimized the cost per case ($490). In low- and medium-prevalence populations, targeted screening using venous testing minimized the cost per case ($729 and $556, respectively). In all populations, regardless of screening strategy, venous testing resulted in a lower cost per case than capillary testing. Sensitivity analyses of all parameters in this model demonstrated that this conclusion is robust. CONCLUSIONS: Universal screening detects all cases of lead poisoning and is the most cost-effective strategy in high-prevalence populations. In populations with lower prevalence, the cost per case detected using targeted screening is less than that of universal screening. The benefit of detecting a greater number of cases using universal screening must be weighed against the extra cost of screening. Regardless of whether a strategy of universal or targeted screening is used, the cost per case using venous testing is less than that of capillary testing.

Capillaries↗
PubMed2006

Trends in sudden cardiovascular death in young competitive athletes after implementation of a preparticipation screening program.

CONTEXT: A nationwide systematic preparticipation athletic screening was introduced in Italy in 1982. The impact of such a program on prevention of sudden cardiovascular death in the athlete remains to be determined. OBJECTIVE: To analyze trends in incidence rates and cardiovascular causes of sudden death in young competitive athletes in relation to preparticipation screening. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A population-based study of trends in sudden cardiovascular death in athletic and nonathletic populations aged 12 to 35 years in the Veneto region of Italy between 1979 and 2004. A parallel study examined trends in cardiovascular causes of disqualification from competitive sports in 42,386 athletes undergoing preparticipation screening at the Center for Sports Medicine in Padua (22,312 in the early screening period [1982-1992] and 20,074 in the late screening period [1993-2004]). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence trends of total cardiovascular and cause-specific sudden death in screened athletes and unscreened nonathletes of the same age range over a 26-year period. RESULTS: During the study period, 55 sudden cardiovascular deaths occurred in screened athletes (1.9 deaths/100,000 person-years) and 265 sudden deaths in unscreened nonathletes (0.79 deaths/100,000 person-years). The annual incidence of sudden cardiovascular death in athletes decreased by 89% (from 3.6/100,000 person-years in 1979-1980 to 0.4/100,000 person-years in 2003-2004; P for trend < .001), whereas the incidence of sudden death among the unscreened nonathletic population did not change significantly. The mortality decline started after mandatory screening was implemented and persisted to the late screening period. Compared with the prescreening period (1979-1981), the relative risk of sudden cardiovascular death in athletes was 0.56 in the early screening period (95% CI, 0.29-1.15; P = .04) and 0.21 in the late screening period (95% CI, 0.09-0.48; P = .001). Most of the reduced mortality was due to fewer cases of sudden death from cardiomyopathies (from 1.50/100,000 person-years in the prescreening period to 0.15/100,000 person-years in the late screening period; P for trend = .002). During the study period, 879 athletes (2.0%) were disqualified from competition due to cardiovascular causes at the Center for Sports Medicine: 455 (2.0%) in the early screening period and 424 (2.1%) in the late screening period. The proportion of athletes who were disqualified for cardiomyopathies increased from 20 (4.4%) of 455 in the early screening period to 40 (9.4%) of 424 in the late screening period (P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of sudden cardiovascular death in young competitive athletes has substantially declined in the Veneto region of Italy since the introduction of a nationwide systematic screening. Mortality reduction was predominantly due to a lower incidence of sudden death from cardiomyopathies that paralleled the increasing identification of athletes with cardiomyopathies at preparticipation screening.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Mammographic screening: patterns of use and estimated impact on breast carcinoma survival.

BACKGROUND: Although many studies support the life-saving potential of screening mammography, the actual utilization of screening and the impact of the actual pattern of screening use on the breast carcinoma death rate, remain incompletely understood. In the current report, the authors describe patterns of screening use among women who were examined at a large screening and diagnostic service and estimate the added mortality associated with missed screening mammograms. METHODS: Mammography use was assessed in a population of 72,417 women who received a total of 254,818 screening mammograms at the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) Avon Comprehensive Breast Center (Boston, MA) between January 1, 1985, and February 19, 2002. A computer simulation of breast carcinoma growth, spread, and detection of breast carcinoma was used to estimate the likely health consequences of various types of screening use. RESULTS: Both prompt return for annual screening and full use of screening over extended periods of time were rare, and comparison of the MGH population with other populations revealed that the low level of use observed in the MGH population was not atypical. Only 6% of women who received a mammogram in 1992 received all annual mammograms that were available over the next 10 years; the mean number of mammograms received during this period was 5.06, or 51% of the number recommended by the American Cancer Society. Computer simulation results indicate that this underutilization of screening should result in higher mortality levels. Women from traditionally underserved socioeconomic, racial, and ethnic groups, women without insurance, and women who did not speak English had lower levels of use compared with other women. Lower levels of use also were observed among women receiving their first mammogram or who in the past had not returned promptly. Women ages 55-65 years had higher levels of use than did younger or older women. Women who previously had breast carcinoma also had higher levels of screening use. Nonetheless, none of the subpopulations of women stratified by age, race, ethnicity, zip code, income,language, insurance, status, previous screening use, or medical history exhibited a widespread propensity to promptly return for annual screening over an extended period of time. CONCLUSIONS: By many measures, the current analysis is one of the most detailed descriptions of screening use to date. The authors observed a level of screening use that was disappointingly low, with potentially negative health-related consequences, among women across categories defined by racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and geographic characteristics; insurance status; language; age; medical history; and previous screening use. Improvements in the promptness with which women return to screening appear to have the potential to lead to considerable reductions in breast carcinoma death.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

The age at which women begin mammographic screening.

BACKGROUND: The American Cancer Society recommends yearly mammographic screening for women starting at the age of 40 years. The authors examined the age at which women began screening at a large tertiary care center. METHODS: Utilization of mammography was assessed in a population of 72,417 women who received 254,818 screening mammograms at the Massachusetts General Hospital Avon Comprehensive Breast Center from January 1, 1985 to February 19, 2002, of which 940 received their first mammogram between January 16, 2000 and February 19, 2002. RESULTS: The median age at first mammogram for women in the population as a whole was 40.4 years. Sixty percent of women had their first mammogram by the end of their 40th year, and almost 90% had begun screening by age 50 years. However, these reassuring findings were not seen in several specific subpopulations of women. Black women began screening at a median age of 41.0 years, 0.7 years later than white women. Hispanic women began screening at a median age of 41.4 years, 1.1 years later than non-Hispanic women. Obese women began screening at a median age of 41.2 years, 1.6 years later than thin women. Women without a primary care physician began screening at a median age of 42.1 years, 1.8 years later than women with a primary care physician. Women without private health insurance began screening at a median age of 46.6 years, 6.3 years later than women with private health coverage. Women who did not speak English began screening at a median age of 49.3 years, 9.0 years later than women for whom English was the primary language. Women who both lacked private health insurance and spoke a language other than English began screening at a median age of 55.3 years, 15.2 years later than women without these characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis presented in the current study provided one of the most detailed descriptions of the age at screening initiation to be performed to date. Most women in the study population began screening by the end of their 40th year. This contrasted with the widespread failure of women to return promptly for subsequent annual examinations. However, specific subpopulations of women were at risk for not beginning screening on time, including women without private insurance, women without a primary care physician, and women who did not speak English. These findings suggest that there is little to be gained from populationwide efforts to encourage entry into the screening process, and that public health efforts should be focused on those subpopulations of women at highest risk for not using screening. These results also indicate that public health efforts to encourage women to start screening may be less critical than interventions to improve prompt return once they have entered the screening system.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Screening for cervical cancer: will women accept less?

BACKGROUND: U.S. professional organizations increasingly agree that most women require Papanicolaou smear screening every 2 to 3 years rather than annually and that most elderly women may stop screening. We sought to describe the attitudes of women in the United States toward less intense screening, specifically, less frequent screening and eventual cessation of screening. METHODS: We conducted a random-digit-dialing telephone survey of women in 2002 (response rate of 75% among eligible women reached by telephone). A nationally representative sample of 360 women aged 40 years or older with no history of cancer was surveyed about their acceptance of less intense screening. RESULTS: Almost all women aged 40 years or older (99%) had had at least one Pap smear; most (59%) were screened annually. When women were asked to choose their preferred frequency for screening, 75% preferred screening at least annually (12% chose screening every 6 months). Less than half (43%) had heard of recommendations advocating less frequent screening. When advised of such recommendations, half of all women believed that they were based on cost. Sixty-nine percent said that they would try to continue being screened annually even if their doctors recommended less frequent screening and advised them of comparable benefits. Only 35% of women thought that there might come a time when they would stop getting Pap smears; of these, almost half would not stop until after age 80 years. The strongest predictor of reluctance to reduce the frequency of screening was a belief that cost was the basis of current screening frequency recommendations. CONCLUSION: Most women in the United States prefer annual Pap smears and are resistant to the idea of less intense screening. Concern that cost considerations rather than evidence form the basis of screening recommendations may partly explain women's reluctance to accept less intense screening.

Age Factors↗
PubMed2000

Impact of technology choice on service provision for universal newborn hearing screening within a busy district hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the implications of technology choice between automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) and transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) on service provision for a universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) program. METHOD: Over a 4-day period, we offered to perform AABR hearing screening on a cohort of 48 well babies in the maternity unit and outpatient department of our busy district hospital. Those parents that consented were asked to sign a consent form and their babies were then screened using the Natus ALGO Model 2e color newborn hearing screener supplied on loan from Neonatal Perspectives Ltd, Manchester, UK. We recorded the patient age at testing, test duration, results obtained (as a pass/refer) and any problems that we experienced with the screening progress, together with parent or user perceived differences between this technology and the current TEOAE screen. A single user carried out all screening. Having collected the AABR data, we then analyzed the implications of the results in relation to service provision in our hospital, utilizing historical data on TEOAE screening. RESULTS: Forty-four mothers, from 48, consented to having their baby screened by AABR and we were able to achieve a result in all 44 babies that we screened. At the standard test criteria of 35 dBnHL, a total 42 babies passed the initial screen in both ears and 2 referred in a single ear only. The test duration was less than 5 minutes for 36 of 44 babies. Applying these results to a model of UNHS generated a per screen cost of 15.98 Pounds for a two-stage OAE/AABR program and 14.25 Pounds for an AABR-only program. Parents found the AABR test acceptable and we found that being able to discuss the screen and hearing with the parents while the screen was taking place both time-efficient and reassuring to parents. In our experience and using our screening model, the OAE/AABR two-stage approach would have generated 509 infants for second-stage screening (AABR stage) before full audiological follow up and the AABR-only approach would have generated 72 infants for second stage. CONCLUSIONS: Testing with the Natus ALGO Model 2e color newborn hearing screener proved to be practical, time-, and cost-efficient. The low initial referral rate would not only save money within our hospital, but serves to keep parental anxiety at a minimum. The high tolerance of ambient noise allowed flexibility in our screening location and timing, improving our ability to screen before discharge. In our setting, the adoption of AABR as our primary screen is more practical and less expensive than TEOAE.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

An exploration of screening practices for prostate cancer and the associated community expenditure.

OBJECTIVES: To determine: (i) the prevalence, reasons for, and demographic and psychosocial predictors of prostate cancer screening among a randomly selected sample of men; and (ii) to estimate the community expenditure involved in the screening of asymptomatic men. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A random sample of men aged 40-79 years was selected from the State Electoral Register of New South Wales, Australia, and asked to complete a computer-assisted telephone interview. The questions determined their demographic characteristics, their subjective health rating compared with others of the same age (5-point scale), the prevalence and reasons for any screening for prostate cancer ('ever screened' and 'screened within the last 12 months'), whether they had undergone a digital rectal examination (DRE), a blood test for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS), and the prevalence of urinary symptoms. Those who had been screened were then asked to nominate the single most important factor in the decision to undergo prostate cancer screening. To estimate community expenditure, the costs for prostate cancer screening were estimated by applying Medicare schedule charges to the screening and subsequent diagnostic tests performed. Two scenarios were developed to estimate costs: the first used guidelines which do not recommend the use of routine screening for all asymptomatic men, and the second was based on guidelines where the routine use of PSA or TRUS as part of a periodic health examination is not recommended, but the use of DRE in asymptomatic men aged 50-70 years is. RESULTS: Of the 551 eligible participants, 86% completed the interview; 44% of participants reported that they had 'ever' been screened, whilst 23% had been screened in the year before the study. Among those who had been screened, the reason reported most often for screening, apart from symptoms and family history, was the doctor's recommendation after a medical assessment of their prostate cancer risk status. Screening status was predicted both by the age of the man and his symptom score. As a result, the community expenditure in New South Wales for screening among asymptomatic men was estimated to be A$6.4 million and A$5.2 million for the first and second scenarios, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that, despite the recommendations of primary bodies that asymptomatic men not be screened for prostate cancer, screening is occurring at a high level and with significant costs to the healthcare system.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Nuchal translucency and first trimester biochemical markers for down syndrome screening: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis that compared the first- and second- trimester screening tools for Down syndrome. STUDY DESIGN: A decision tree was designed that compared four possible screens for Down syndrome: (1) current second- trimester expanded maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein test (AFP), (2) first-trimester nuchal translucency screen, (3) first-trimester serum screen, and (4) combined first-trimester screen with both nuchal translucency screen and a serum screen. Incremental cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated that compared the first-trimester screens with expanded alpha-fetoprotein. RESULTS: The combined screen (nuchal translucency screen + first-trimester serum screen) identified 3,833 Down syndrome fetuses, the nuchal translucency alone identified 3,413 Down syndrome fetuses, and the first- trimester serum screen identified 2,993 Down syndrome fetuses. Each of these screens was an improvement over the current expanded AFP screen, which diagnosed 2,446 Down syndrome fetuses. It would cost $98,381 for each additional Down syndrome case that would be identified by nuchal translucency alone, with a benefit-to-cost ratio of 4.85. The addition of the first-trimester serum screen is still cost-effective compared with expanded AFP; the cost would be $319,934 for each additional Down syndrome fetus who was identified, which would be a benefit-to-cost ratio of 1.57. CONCLUSION: First-trimester screening for Down syndrome with nuchal translucency screening alone or with serum markers is more clinically effective and cost-effective than the current expanded AFP screen that is being used.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2003

Interval carcinomas in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC)-Rotterdam.

BACKGROUND: The interval cancer rate is an important parameter for determining the sensitivity of a screening procedure and the screening interval. We evaluated the time and mechanism of detection and the stage distribution of interval prostate cancers diagnosed during a 4-year screening interval. METHODS: We determined the rate of interval cancers and the sensitivity of the screening protocol (involving prostate-specific antigen, digital rectal and transrectal ultrasound examinations) in a cohort of 17 226 men (8350 on the screened arm, 8876 on the control arm) enrolled consecutively on the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer-Rotterdam. Men on the screened arm received a first screen between October 1993 and December 1996 and a scheduled second screen 4 years later. Prostate cancers detected in men enrolled on the control arm over the same 4-year period and, between screens, in men on the screened arm, were identified by linkage to the Dutch national cancer registry. RESULTS: During the first screen, 412 prostate cancers were detected. During the subsequent 4-year period, 135 cancers were diagnosed in men in the control arm and 25 cancers were diagnosed in men in the screened arm. Seven of the 25 cancers were diagnosed in men who had refused a recommended biopsy at their initial screen. Of the remaining 18 cancers, all were classified as stage T1A-C or T2A and none were poorly differentiated or metastatic. The rate of interval cancers relative to the number of cancers in the control group was 18.5% (25/135), or 13.3% (18/135), if the seven who refused an initial biopsy were excluded. The sensitivity of the screening protocol was 79.8% when considering all 25 interval cancers and 85.5% when considering 18 interval cancers. CONCLUSION: The interval cancer rate with a 4-year screening interval was low, confirming that the screening procedure has a high sensitivity and that the 4-year screening interval is reasonable.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis of screening mammography.

BACKGROUND: Many guidelines recommend screening mammography every 1-2 years for women older than 40 years; more than 70% of women now participate in routine screening. No studies have examined the societal impact of screening practices over the past decade in the United States on costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). We performed a retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis comparing actual and alternative screening mammography scenarios. METHODS: We used a discrete-event simulation model of breast cancer epidemiology to estimate the costs and the number of QALYs that were associated with observed screening mammography patterns in the United States from 1990 to 2000 for women aged 40 years or older. We also estimated costs and QALYS for no screening and for 64 alternative screening scenarios. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were computed. Sensitivity analyses were performed on key parameters. RESULTS: Actual U.S. screening patterns from 1990 to 2000 accrued 947.5 million QALYs and cost $166 billion over the lifetimes of the screened women, resulting in a gain of 1.7 million QALYs for an additional cost of $62.5 billion compared with no screening. Among those polices that were not dominated--i.e., for which no alternative existed that produced more QALYs for lower costs--screening all women aged 40-80 years annually per some U.S. guidelines was the most expensive option, costing $58,000 per additional QALY gained compared with the next most costly alternative, screening all women aged 45-80 years annually. Many alternative screening scenarios generated more QALYs for less cost (with savings up to $6 billion) than actual screening patterns over the study period. Sensitivity analysis showed that conclusions about the cost-effectiveness of screening mammography policies were highly sensitive to small, short-term detrimental effects on quality of life from the screening test itself. CONCLUSIONS: Choosing among the efficient policies to guide current screening recommendations requires consideration of costs to promote participation in screening and measurement of acute quality-of-life effects of mammography.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

The cost effectiveness of voluntary prenatal and routine newborn HIV screening in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of voluntary prenatal and routine postnatal HIV screening in the cohort of pregnant women and newborns in the United States. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis. We developed a decision model to analyze the cost effectiveness of enhanced prenatal screening and routine newborn screening for HIV. We also analyzed the incremental cost effectiveness of routine newborn screening when improved voluntary prenatal screening is already in place. PARTICIPANTS: Analysis of the cohort of pregnant women and newborns in the United States. INTERVENTIONS: Enhanced prenatal screening, or routine newborn screening for HIV. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Infections averted, life expectancy, costs, and incremental cost effectiveness. RESULTS: Improved participation in voluntary prenatal HIV screening would result in an additional 1.1 million women being screened annually, would identify an additional 527 HIV-infected mothers annually, would avert 150 infections in newborns, and would cost $8,900 U.S. per life-year gained. Routine newborn HIV screening would test 3.9 million infants annually, would identify 1061 HIV-infected mothers, would avert 266 infections in newborns, and would cost $7,000 U.S. per life-year gained. If improved voluntary prenatal screening is already in place, routine newborn screening would avert an additional 135 infections in newborns, at an incremental cost of $10, 600 U.S. per life-year gained. The screening programs are likely to be cost effective over a wide range of assumptions regarding key factors in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Improved voluntary prenatal HIV screening of women and routine screening of newborns are cost effective. Routine newborn screening becomes less attractive as the rate of voluntary prenatal screening increases. Improved participation in voluntary prenatal screening has the added benefit that mothers maintain their right to determine whether they are tested for HIV.

AIDS Serodiagnosis↗
PubMed2004

Colorectal cancer screening disparities related to obesity and gender.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is associated with a higher incidence of colorectal cancer and increased colorectal cancer mortality. Obese women are less likely to undergo breast and cervical cancer screening than nonobese women. It is not known whether obesity is associated with a lower likelihood of colorectal cancer screening. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether there is an association between body mass index (BMI) and rates of colorectal cancer screening. To examine whether BMI-related disparities in colorectal cancer screening differ between men and women. DESIGN AND SETTING: The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, a cross-sectional random-digit telephone survey of noninstitutionalized adults conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and state health departments in the 50 states and Washington, DC in 1999. PATIENTS: Survey respondents (N= 52886) between 51 and 80 years of age representing 64563332 U.S. adults eligible for colorectal cancer screening. INTERVENTIONS AND MEASUREMENTS: Adjusted rates of self-reported colorectal cancer screening with fecal occult blood testing within the past year or endoscopic screening (sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy) within the past 5 years. RESULTS: The colorectal cancer screening rate was 43.8% overall. The rate of screening by FOBT within the last year or endoscopic screening within the past 5 years was 39.5% for the morbidly obese group, 45.0% for the obese group, 44.3% for the overweight group, and 43.5% for the normal weight group. The difference in screening rates was entirely attributable to differences in BMI among women. After statistical adjustment for potential confounders, morbidly obese women were less likely than normal weight women to be screened (adjusted rate difference, -5.6%; 95% confidence interval, -8.5 to -2.6). Screening rates among normal weight, overweight, and obese women, and among men in different weight groups did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal cancer screening rates among age-eligible persons in the U.S. are disturbingly low. Morbidly obese women, who are at higher risk than others to develop and to die from colorectal cancer, are less likely to be screened. Efforts to increase colorectal cancer screening are needed for all age-eligible groups, but should also include targeted screening of morbidly obese women since they could reap substantial clinical benefits from screening.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

Cost-utility of one-time colonoscopic screening for colorectal cancer at various ages.

OBJECTIVE: One-time colonoscopy has been recommended as a possible colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategy. Because the incidence of colorectal neoplasia increases with age, the effectiveness and cost of this strategy depend on the age at which screening occurs. The purpose of this study was to investigate the age-dependent cost-utility of one-time colonoscopic screening. METHODS: We constructed a computer simulation model of the natural history of colorectal neoplasia. This model was used to compare the cost-utility of no screening and age-based strategies employing one-time colonoscopic screening (age ranges evaluated: 45-49, 50-54, 55-59, and 60-64 yr). RESULTS: We determined that one-time colonoscopic screening in men age <60 yr and in women age <65 yr dominates never screening and screening at older ages. For both sexes, one-time colonoscopic screening between 50 and 54 yr of age is associated with a marginal cost-utility of less than $10,000 per additional quality-adjusted life-year compared to screening between 55 and 60 yr of age. One-time colonoscopic screening between 45 and 49 yr of age is either dominated (women) or associated with a marginal cost-utility of $69,000/per quality-adjusted life-year (men) compared to screening between 50 and 54 yr of age. The marginal cost-utility of one-time colonoscopic screening is relatively insensitive to plausible changes in the cost of colonoscopy, the cost of CRC treatment, the sensitivity of colonoscopy for colorectal neoplasia, the utility values representing the morbidity associated with the CRC-related health states, and the discount rate. CONCLUSIONS: One-time colonoscopic screening between 50 and 54 yr of age is cost-effective compared to no screening and screening at older ages in both men and women. Screening in men between 45 and 49 yr of age may be cost-effective compared to screening between 50 and 54 yr of age depending on societal willingness to pay.

Age Factors↗