Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2004 Oct;80(5):363-70.
doi: 10.1136/sti.2004.009654.

Modelling the healthcare costs of an opportunistic chlamydia screening programme

Affiliations

Modelling the healthcare costs of an opportunistic chlamydia screening programme

E J Adams et al. Sex Transm Infect. 2004 Oct.

Abstract

Objectives: To estimate the average cost per screening offer, cost per testing episode and cost per chlamydia positive episode for an opportunistic chlamydia screening programme (including partner management), and to explore the uncertainty of parameter assumptions, based on the costs to the healthcare system.

Methods: A decision tree was constructed and parameterised using empirical data from a chlamydia screening pilot study and other sources. The model was run using baseline data from the pilot, and univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses were conducted.

Results: The total estimated cost for offering screening over 12 months to 33,215 females aged 16-24 was 493,412 pounds . The average cost (with partner management) was 14.88 pounds per screening offer (90% credibility interval (CI) 10.34 to 18.56), 21.83 pounds per testing episode (90% CI 18.16 to 24.20), and 38.36 pounds per positive episode (90% CI 33.97 to 42.25). The proportion of individuals accepting screening, the clinician (general practitioner/nurse) time and their relative involvement in discussing screening, the test cost, the time to notify patients of their results, and the receptionist time recruiting patients had the greatest impact on the outcomes in both the univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions: Results from this costing study may be used to inform resource allocation for current and future chlamydia screening programme implementation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Feb;79(1):16-21 - PubMed
    1. Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Feb;79(1):22-7 - PubMed
    1. Sex Transm Dis. 1993 Jan-Feb;20(1):28-35 - PubMed
    1. N Engl J Med. 1996 May 23;334(21):1362-6 - PubMed
    1. Sex Transm Dis. 1997 Mar;24(3):131-41 - PubMed