Dataset Information

Cost effectiveness of abdominal aortic aneurysm screening and rescreening in men in a modern context: evaluation of a hypothetical cohort using a decision analytical model.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess the cost effectiveness of different screening strategies for abdominal aortic aneurysm in men, from the perspective of a national health service.

Setting

Screening units at regional hospitals.

Participants

Hypothetical cohort of 65 year old men from the general population.

Main outcome measures

Costs (£ in 2010) and effect on health outcomes (quality adjusted life years (QALYs)).

Results

Screening seems to be highly cost effective compared with not screening. The model estimated a 92% probability that some form of screening would be cost effective at a threshold of £20,000 (€24,790; $31,460). If men with an aortic diameter of 25-29 mm at the initial screening were rescreened once after five years, 452 men per 100,000 initially screened would benefit from early detection, whereas lifetime rescreening every five years would detect 794 men per 100,000. We estimated the associated incremental cost effectiveness ratios for rescreening once and lifetime rescreening to be £10,013 and £29,680 per QALY, respectively. The individual probability of being the most cost effective strategy was higher for each rescreening strategy than for the screening once strategy (in view of the £20,000 threshold).

Conclusions

This study confirms the cost effectiveness of screening versus no screening and lends further support to considerations of rescreening men at least once for abdominal aortic aneurysm.

SUBMITTER: Sogaard R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3390434 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether there is a relation between aortic diameter and morbidity and mortality in men screened for abdominal aortic aneurysm.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingHighland and Western Isles (a large, sparsely populated area of Scotland).Participants8146 men aged 65-74.Main outcome measuresMorbidity and mortality in relation to presence of abdominal aortic aneurysm and three categories of aortic diameter (≤ 24 mm, 25-29 mm, and ≥ 30 mm).ResultsWhen screened, 414 men (5.1%) had an aneurysm (diameter ≥ 30 mm), 669 (8.2%) an aortic diameter of 25-29 mm, and 7063 (86.7%) an aortic diameter of ≤ 24 mm. The cohort was followed up for a median of 7.4 (interquartile range 6.9-8.2) years. Mortality was significantly associated with aortic diameter: 512 (7.2%) men in the ≤ 24 mm group died compared with 69 (10.3%) in the 25-29 mm group and 73 (17.6%) in the ≥ 30 mm group. The mortality risk in men with an aneurysm or with an aorta measuring 25-29 mm was significantly higher than in men with an aorta of ≤ 24 mm. The increased mortality risk in the 25-29 mm group was reduced when taking confounders such as smoking and known heart disease into account. After adjustment, compared with men with an aortic diameter of ≤ 24 mm, the risk of hospital admission for cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was significantly higher in men with aneurysm and those with aortas measuring 25-29 mm. Men with an aneurysm also had an increased risk of hospital admission for cerebrovascular disease, atherosclerosis, peripheral arterial disease, and respiratory disease. In men with aortas measuring 25-29 mm, the risk of hospital admission with abdominal aortic aneurysm was significantly higher than in men with an aorta of ≤ 24 mm (adjusted hazard ratio 6.7, 99% confidence interval 3.4 to 13.2) and this increased risk became apparent two years after screening.ConclusionsMen with abdominal aortic aneurysm and those with aortic diameters measuring 25-29 mm have an increased risk of mortality and subsequent hospital admissions compared with men with an aorta diameter of ≤ 24 mm. Consideration should be given to control of risk factors and to rescreening men with aortas measuring 25-29 mm at index scanning.