Economic aspects of screening for cervical cancer in New Zealand
Bethwaite J, Rayner A, Bethwaite P
Record Status
This is a critical abstract of an economic evaluation that meets the criteria for inclusion on NHS EED. Each abstract contains a brief summary of the methods, the results and conclusions followed by a detailed critical assessment on the reliability of the study and the conclusions drawn.
Health technology
Cervical cytology.
Type of intervention
Screening.
Economic study type
Cost-effectiveness analysis.
Study population
Adult women.
Setting
General practice. The study was carried out in New Zealand.
Dates to which data relate
Price related to 1984.
Source of effectiveness data
Review of the literature.
Modelling
Epidemiological cohort model (Model of survival and disease).
Measure of benefits used in the economic analysis
Lives saved.
Direct costs
Direct costs are to the health service and include visits to GP and gynaecologist, drugs, nursing, smear, cytology, inpatient and outpatient procedures and terminal care. Price informationrelates to 1984.
Currency
New Zealand dollars (NZ$). In the DH Register of Cost-Effectiveness Studies, the original results were converted to UK pounds sterling () using GDP purchasing power parities, and reflated to 1991, using the NHS pay and prices index.
Sensitivity analysis
No sensitivity analysis was carried out.
Synthesis of costs and benefits
Cost duration was 1 year. Incremental cost per life saved for: cervical cytology every year versus diagnosis when symptoms occur 66300; cervical cytology every three years versus diagnosis when symptoms occur was 24600; cervical cytology every five years versus diagnosis when symptoms occur was 18700; cervical cytology every seven years versus diagnosis when symptoms occur was 19800; cervical cytology every year versus cervical cytology every three years was 270000; cervical cytology every three years versus cervical cytology every five years was 46700; cervical cytology every five years versus cervical cytology every seven years was 14200.
CRD Commentary
(This commentary was not written by CRD but by the authors of the DH Register).
1)Labelling and unnecessary treatment can not be addressed with this outcome measure. 2)The paper acknowledges the natural history of cervical disease is uncertain. The findings are speculative.
Bibliographic details
Bethwaite J, Rayner A, Bethwaite P. Economic aspects of screening for cervical cancer in New Zealand. New Zealand Medical Journal 1986; 99(811): 747-751
Costs and Cost Analysis; Female; Humans; Mass Screening /economics; Models, Theoretical; New Zealand; Time Factors; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms /prevention & Vaginal Smears /economics; Value of Life; control