Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Screening for Colorectal Cancer in Japan
TSUJI, I., FUKAO, A., SHOJI, T., KUWAJIMA, I., SUGAWARA, N. and HISAMICHI, S. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Screening for Colorectal Cancer in Japan. Tohoku J. Exp. Med., 1991, 164 (4), 269-278 - To clarify the best cost-effective screening strategy for colorectal cancer in Japan, the cost-effectiv...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Tohoku Journal of Experimental Medicine 1991, Vol.164(4), pp.269-278 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | TSUJI, I., FUKAO, A., SHOJI, T., KUWAJIMA, I., SUGAWARA, N. and HISAMICHI, S. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Screening for Colorectal Cancer in Japan. Tohoku J. Exp. Med., 1991, 164 (4), 269-278 - To clarify the best cost-effective screening strategy for colorectal cancer in Japan, the cost-effectiveness ratio was compared among six currently performed procedures. The analysis was made using a simulation model to estimate long-term cost and effectiveness of the screening programs. In the screening by the immunological fecal occult blood test (FOBT), a comparison between the one- and two-day fecal collection methods indicated that the latter was more cost-effective than the former. A comparison was also made on the four workup methods: barium enema (BE) alone, a combination of BE and sigmoidoscopy (BE+SIG), total colonoscopy (TCF) alone, and a combination of BE and TCF (BE+TCF). The cost-effectiveness ratio was the lowest in the method using TCF alone, followed by those based on BE alone and BE+TCF, and the highest in the BE+SIG method. The superiority of TCF alone strategy was stable over a range of estimates such as the sensitivity of diagnostic tests, the probability of complications due to TCF, etc. It is concluded that a combination of the two-day FOBT and TCF yields the best cost-effectiveness. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0040-8727 1349-3329 |
DOI: | 10.1620/tjem.164.269 |