Why the study?
Does one-time ultrasonographic screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm improve cost-effectiveness compared to current clinical practice in 65-year-old men?
Does one-time ultrasonographic screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm improve cost-effectiveness compared to current clinical practice in 65-year-old men?
A one-time ultrasonographic screening program for abdominal aortic aneurysm in 65-year-old men yields positive health outcomes at a reasonable cost and is highly likely to be cost-effective.
May support cost-effectiveness of AAA screening in 65-year-old men; leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
BACKGROUND: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) causes about 2 per cent of all deaths in men over the age of 65 years. A major improvement in operative mortality would have little impact on total mortality, so screening for AAA has been recommended as a solution. The cost-effectiveness of a programme that invited 65-year-old men for ultrasonographic screening was compared with current clinical practice in a decision-analytical model. METHODS: In a probabilistic Markov model, costs and health outcomes of a screening programme and current clinical practice were simulated over a lifetime perspective. To populate the model with the best available evidence, data from published papers, vascular databases and primary research were used. RESULTS: The results of the base-case analysis showed that the incremental cost per gained life-year for a screening programme compared with current practice was 7760, and that for a quality-adjusted life-year was 9700. The probability of screening being cost-effective was high. CONCLUSION: A financially and practically feasible screening programme for AAA, in which men are invited for ultrasonography in the year in which they turn 65, appears to yield positive health outcomes at a reasonable cost.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Henriksson et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: