Cost-benefit analysis of first-void urine Chlamydia trachomatis screening program
- PMID: 9699769
- DOI: 10.1016/s0029-7844(98)00167-7
Cost-benefit analysis of first-void urine Chlamydia trachomatis screening program
Abstract
Objective: To perform a cost-benefit analysis of a Chlamydia trachomatis screening program based on first-void urine testing of asymptomatic women using a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test.
Methods: A decision tree was developed. Selected variables based on assumptions were subjected to sensitivity analyses to make the model accurate and defensible.
Results: Screening for chlamydial infections using the PCR test was shown to be cost-effective even in low-prevalence populations. Compared with a symptom-driven no-screening situation, a universal C trachomatis screening program using the PCR test would save money, in terms of direct cost, when the baseline prevalence of C trachomatis infection exceeds 3.9%.
Conclusion: Cost analyses are still rare among trials that compare pharmacologic or procedural health care interventions. Socioeconomic studies linking secondary prevention of C trachomatis infection and infertility and adverse pregnancy outcome are needed to convince public health authorities of the need for and the benefit of such programs.
Similar articles
-
Cost effectiveness analysis of a population based screening programme for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women by means of home obtained urine specimens.Sex Transm Infect. 2001 Aug;77(4):276-82. doi: 10.1136/sti.77.4.276. Sex Transm Infect. 2001. PMID: 11463928 Free PMC article.
-
Cost-effectiveness analysis of Chlamydia trachomatis screening in Dutch pregnant women.Pathog Glob Health. 2016 Oct-Dec;110(7-8):292-302. doi: 10.1080/20477724.2016.1258162. Pathog Glob Health. 2016. PMID: 27958189 Free PMC article.
-
Cost-effectiveness of partner pharmacotherapy in screening women for asymptomatic infection with Chlamydia Trachomatis.Value Health. 2001 May-Jun;4(3):266-75. doi: 10.1046/j.1524-4733.2001.43009.x. Value Health. 2001. PMID: 11705188
-
Chlamydia trachomatis screening in family planning centers: a review of cost/benefit evaluations in different countries.Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 1996 Dec;1(4):301-9. doi: 10.3109/13625189609150675. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 1996. PMID: 9678112 Review.
-
Overestimation of complication rates in evaluations of Chlamydia trachomatis screening programmes--implications for cost-effectiveness analyses.Int J Epidemiol. 2004 Apr;33(2):416-25. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyh029. Int J Epidemiol. 2004. PMID: 15082651 Review.
Cited by
-
Screening pregnant women in the 2015 European guideline on the management of Chlamydia trachomatis infections.Int J STD AIDS. 2016 Oct;27(12):1134-1136. doi: 10.1177/0956462416650600. Int J STD AIDS. 2016. PMID: 27694561 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Cost-effectiveness analysis of Chlamydia trachomatis screening via internet-based self-collected swabs compared with clinic-based sample collection.Sex Transm Dis. 2011 Sep;38(9):815-20. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e31821b0f50. Sex Transm Dis. 2011. PMID: 21844736 Free PMC article.
-
Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: a systematic review of the economic evaluations and modelling.Sex Transm Infect. 2006 Jun;82(3):193-200; discussion 201. doi: 10.1136/sti.2005.017517. Sex Transm Infect. 2006. PMID: 16731666 Free PMC article.
-
One to one interventions to reduce sexually transmitted infections and under the age of 18 conceptions: a systematic review of the economic evaluations.Sex Transm Infect. 2007 Oct;83(6):441-6. doi: 10.1136/sti.2007.025361. Epub 2007 Jul 11. Sex Transm Infect. 2007. PMID: 17626115 Free PMC article.
-
Incidence of severe reproductive tract complications associated with diagnosed genital chlamydial infection: the Uppsala Women's Cohort Study.Sex Transm Infect. 2006 Jun;82(3):212-8. doi: 10.1136/sti.2005.017186. Sex Transm Infect. 2006. PMID: 16731670 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical