Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Mailed FIT in a Safety Net Clinic Population

被引:16
作者
Pignone, Michael [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Lanier, Brennan [1 ]
Kluz, Nicole [1 ]
Valencia, Victoria [1 ]
Chang, Patrick [2 ]
Olmstead, Todd [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas Austin, Dell Med Sch, Dept Internal Med, Austin, TX 78712 USA
[2] Univ Texas Austin, Dell Med Sch, Depat Populat Hlth, Austin, TX 78712 USA
[3] Univ Texas Austin, Dell Med Sch, Livestrong Canc Inst, Austin, TX 78712 USA
[4] Univ Texas Austin, Lyndon B Johnson Sch Publ Affairs, Austin, TX 78712 USA
关键词
colorectal cancer; screening; fecal immunochemical testing; cost effectiveness; CANCER STATISTICS;
D O I
10.1007/s11606-021-06691-y
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) can increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates, including for vulnerable patients, but its cost-effectiveness is unclear. Objective We sought to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the initial cycle of our mailed FIT program from November 2017 to July 2019 in a federally qualified health center (FQHC) system in Central Texas. Design Single group intervention and economic analysis Participants Eligible patients were those ages 50-75 who had been seen recently in a system practice and were not up to date with screening. Intervention The program mailing packet included an introductory letter in plain language, the FIT itself, easy to read instructions, and a postage-paid lab mailer, supplemented with written and text messaging reminders. Main Measures We measured effectiveness based on completion of mailed FIT and cost-effectiveness in terms of cost per person screened. Costs were measured using detailed micro-costing techniques from the perspective of a third-party payer and expressed in 2019 US dollars. Direct costs were based on material supply costs and detailed observations of labor required, valued at the wage rate. Key Results Of the 22,838 eligible patients who received program materials, mean age was 59.0, 51.5% were female, and 43.9% were Latino. FIT were successfully completed by 19.2% (4395/22,838) patients at an average direct cost of $5275.70 per 500-patient mailing. Assuming completed tests from the mailed intervention represent incremental screening, the direct cost per patient screened, compared with no intervention, was $54.83. Incorporating start-up and indirect costs increases total costs to $7014.45 and cost per patient screened to $72.90. Alternately, assuming 2.5% and 5% screening without the intervention increased the direct (total) cost per patient screened to $60.03 ($80.80) and $67.05 ($91.47), respectively. Conclusions Mailed FIT is an effective and cost-effective population health strategy for CRC screening in vulnerable patients.
引用
收藏
页码:3441 / 3447
页数:7
相关论文
共 16 条
[1]   Effectiveness of a Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach Program in Community Health Clinics The STOP CRC Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial [J].
Coronado, Gloria D. ;
Petrik, Amanda F. ;
Vollmer, William M. ;
Taplin, Stephen H. ;
Keast, Erin M. ;
Fields, Scott ;
Green, Beverly B. .
JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2018, 178 (09) :1174-1181
[2]  
Drummond MF, 2015, Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes
[3]   Mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach for colorectal cancer screening: Summary of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-sponsored summit [J].
Gupta, Samir ;
Coronado, Gloria D. ;
Argenbright, Keith ;
Brenner, Alison T. ;
Castaneda, Sheila F. ;
Dominitz, Jason A. ;
Green, Beverly ;
Issaka, Rachel B. ;
Levin, Theodore R. ;
Reuland, Daniel S. ;
Richardson, Lisa C. ;
Robertson, Douglas J. ;
Singal, Amit G. ;
Pignone, Michael .
CA-A CANCER JOURNAL FOR CLINICIANS, 2020, 70 (04) :283-298
[4]   Costs and Benefits of an Organized Fecal Immunochemical Test-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in the United States [J].
Guy, Gery P., Jr. ;
Richardson, Lisa C. ;
Pignone, Michael P. ;
Plescia, Marcus .
CANCER, 2014, 120 (15) :2308-2315
[5]   Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) Statement [J].
Husereau, Don ;
Drummond, Michael ;
Petrou, Stavros ;
Carswell, Chris ;
Moher, David ;
Greenberg, Dan ;
Augustovski, Federico ;
Briggs, Andrew H. ;
Mauskopf, Josephine ;
Loder, Elizabeth .
VALUE IN HEALTH, 2013, 16 (02) :E1-E5
[6]   Mailed Outreach Is Superior to Usual Care Alone for Colorectal Cancer Screening in the USA: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis [J].
Jager, Mark ;
Demb, Josh ;
Asghar, Ali ;
Selby, Kevin ;
Mello, Evelyn Marquez ;
Heskett, Karen M. ;
Lieberman, Alicea J. ;
Geng, Zhuo ;
Bharti, Balambal ;
Singh, Siddharth ;
Gupta, Samir .
DIGESTIVE DISEASES AND SCIENCES, 2019, 64 (09) :2489-2496
[7]   Cancer Statistics, 2009 [J].
Jemal, Ahmedin ;
Siegel, Rebecca ;
Ward, Elizabeth ;
Hao, Yongping ;
Xu, Jiaquan ;
Thun, Michael J. .
CA-A CANCER JOURNAL FOR CLINICIANS, 2009, 59 (04) :225-249
[8]   Effectiveness and cost of multilayered colorectal cancer screening promotion interventions at federally qualified health centers in Washington State [J].
Kemper, Kathryn E. ;
Glaze, Becky L. ;
Eastman, Casey L. ;
Waldron, Roxane C. ;
Hoover, Sonja ;
Flagg, T'Ronda ;
Tangka, Florence K. L. ;
Subramanian, Sujha .
CANCER, 2018, 124 (21) :4121-4129
[9]   A cost-effectiveness analysis of a colorectal cancer screening program in safety net clinics [J].
Meenan, Richard T. ;
Coronado, Gloria D. ;
Petrik, Amanda ;
Green, Beverly B. .
PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2019, 120 :119-125
[10]  
National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable, COLORECTAL CANC SCRE