Comparative cost-effectiveness of mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT)-based interventions for increasing colorectal cancer screening in the medicaid population

被引:13
作者
Wheeler, Stephanie B. [1 ,2 ]
O'Leary, Meghan C. [1 ]
Rhode, Jewels [2 ]
Yang, Jeff Y. [3 ]
Drechsel, Rebecca [4 ]
Plescia, Marcus [5 ]
Reuland, Daniel S. [2 ,6 ]
Brenner, Alison T. [2 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Univ N Carolina, Gillings Sch Global Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Policy & Management, 1104E McGavran Greenberg Hall,CB 7411, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
[2] Univ N Carolina, Lineberger Comprehens Canc Ctr, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
[3] Univ N Carolina, Dept Epidemiol, Gillings Sch Global Publ Hlth, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
[4] Mecklenburg Cty Publ Hlth Dept, Charlotte, NC USA
[5] Assoc State & Terr Hlth Officials, Charlotte, NC USA
[6] Univ N Carolina, Div Gen Med & Clin Epidemiol, Sch Med, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
costs and cost analysis; early detection of cancer; mass screening; Medicaid; preventive health services; COLONOSCOPY; COMMUNITY; CARE; PARTICIPATION; FACILITATORS; ELIGIBILITY; DISPARITIES; DIAGNOSIS; BARRIERS; OUTREACH;
D O I
10.1002/cncr.32992
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background Mailed reminders to promote colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) have been shown to be effective in the Medicaid population, in which screening is underused. However, little is known regarding the cost-effectiveness of these interventions, with or without an included FIT kit. METHODS The authors conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized controlled trial that compared the effectiveness of a reminder + FIT intervention versus a reminder-only intervention in increasing FIT screening. The analysis compared the costs per person screened for CRC screening associated with the reminder + FIT versus the reminder-only alternative using a 1-year time horizon. Input data for a cohort of 35,000 unscreened North Carolina Medicaid enrollees ages 52 to 64 years were derived from the trial and microcosting. Inputs and outputs were estimated from 2 perspectives-the Medicaid/state perspective and the health clinic/facility perspective-using probabilistic sensitivity analysis to evaluate uncertainty. Results The anticipated number of CRC screenings, including both FIT and screening colonoscopies, was higher for the reminder + FIT alternative (n = 8131; 23.2%) than for the reminder-only alternative (n = 5533; 15.8%). From the Medicaid/state perspective, the reminder + FIT alternative dominated the reminder-only alternative, with lower costs and higher screening rates. From the health clinic/facility perspective, the reminder + FIT versus the reminder-only alternative resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $116 per person screened. Conclusions The reminder + FIT alternative was cost saving per additional Medicaid enrollee screened compared with the reminder-only alternative from the Medicaid/state perspective and likely cost-effective from the health clinic/facility perspective. The results also demonstrate that health departments and state Medicaid programs can efficiently mail FIT kits to large numbers of Medicaid enrollees to increase CRC screening completion.
引用
收藏
页码:4197 / 4208
页数:12
相关论文
共 48 条
[41]   Costs of promoting cancer screening: Evidence from CDC's Colorectal Cancer Control Prograrn (CRCCP) [J].
Tangka, Florence K. L. ;
Subramanian, Sujha ;
Hoover, Sonja ;
Royalty, Janet ;
Joseph, Kristy ;
DeGroff, Amy ;
Joseph, Djenaba ;
Chattopadhyay, Sajal .
EVALUATION AND PROGRAM PLANNING, 2017, 62 :67-72
[42]   Clinical costs of colorectal cancer screening in 5 federally funded demonstration programs [J].
Tangka, Florence K. L. ;
Subramanian, Sujha ;
Beebe, Maggie C. ;
Hoover, Sonja ;
Royalty, Janet ;
Seeff, Laura C. .
CANCER, 2013, 119 :2863-2869
[43]  
The Community Guide, COMM PREV SERV TASK
[44]   The Colorectal Cancer Screening Process in Community Settings: A Conceptual Model for the Population-Based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens Consortium [J].
Tiro, Jasmin A. ;
Kamineni, Aruna ;
Levin, Theodore R. ;
Zheng, Yingye ;
Schottinger, Joanne S. ;
Rutter, Carolyn M. ;
Corley, Douglas A. ;
Skinner, Celette S. ;
Chubak, Jessica ;
Doubeni, Chyke A. ;
Halm, Ethan A. ;
Gupta, Samir ;
Wemli, Karen J. ;
Klabunde, Carrie .
CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION, 2014, 23 (07) :1147-1158
[45]  
US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2018, MAY 2016 STAT OCC EM
[46]  
US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2018, CONS PRIC IND
[47]   Regional variation in colorectal cancer testing and geographic availability of care in a publicly insured population [J].
Wheeler, Stephanie B. ;
Kuo, Tzy-Mey ;
Goyal, Ravi K. ;
Meyer, Anne-Marie ;
Lich, Kristen Hassmiller ;
Gillen, Emily M. ;
Tyree, Seth ;
Lewis, Carmen L. ;
Crutchfield, Trisha M. ;
Martens, Christa E. ;
Tangka, Florence ;
Richardson, Lisa C. ;
Pignone, Michael P. .
HEALTH & PLACE, 2014, 29 :114-123
[48]  
White A, 2017, MMWR-MORBID MORTAL W, V66, P1, DOI 10.15585/mmwr.mm6608a1