BMJ, doi: 10.1136/bmj.39262.683345.AE, (Published 26 July 2007)

Research

Cost effectiveness of home based population screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in the UK: economic evaluation of chlamydia screening studies (ClaSS) project

Tracy E Roberts, senior lecturer in health economics1, Suzanne Robinson, lecturer in health economics1, Pelham M Barton, lecturer in mathematical modelling1, Stirling Bryan, professor of health economics1, Anne McCarthy, project manager2, John Macleod, senior lecturer in primary care3, Matthias Egger, professor of epidemiology and public health4, Nicola Low, reader in epidemiology and public health4

1 Health Economics Facility, HSMC, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2RT, 2 Department of Community Based Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol BS6 6JL, 3 Department of Primary Care and General Practice, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, 4 Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Berne, Berne, CH-3012, Switzerland

Correspondence to: T E Roberts  T.E.Roberts{at}bham.ac.uk

Objective To investigate the cost effectiveness of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis compared with a policy of no organised screening in the United Kingdom.

Design Economic evaluation using a transmission dynamic mathematical model.

Setting Central and southwest England.

Participants Hypothetical population of 50 000 men and women, in which all those aged 16-24 years were invited to be screened each year.

Main outcome measures Cost effectiveness based on major outcomes averted, defined as pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancy, infertility, or neonatal complications.

Results The incremental cost per major outcome averted for a programme of screening women only (assuming eight years of screening) was £22 300 ({euro}33 000; $45 000) compared with no organised screening. For a programme screening both men and women, the incremental cost effectiveness ratio was approximately £28 900. Pelvic inflammatory disease leading to hospital admission was the most frequently averted major outcome. The model was highly sensitive to the incidence of major outcomes and to uptake of screening. When both were increased the cost effectiveness ratio fell to £6200 per major outcome averted for screening women only.

Conclusions Proactive register based screening for chlamydia is not cost effective if the uptake of screening and incidence of complications are based on contemporary empirical studies, which show lower rates than commonly assumed. These data are relevant to discussions about the cost effectiveness of the opportunistic model of chlamydia screening being introduced in England.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

How not to do things
Rajendra Kale
BMJ 2007 335: 0. [Extract] [Full Text]

Screening programmes for chlamydial infection: when will we ever learn?
Nicola Low
BMJ 2007 334: 725-728. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Partner notification of chlamydia infection in primary care: randomised controlled trial and analysis of resource use
Nicola Low, Anne McCarthy, Tracy E Roberts, Mia Huengsberg, Emma Sanford, Jonathan A C Sterne, John Macleod, Chris Salisbury, Karl Pye, Aisha Holloway, Andrea Morcom, Rita Patel, Suzanne M Robinson, Paddy Horner, Pelham M Barton, and Matthias Egger
BMJ 2006 332: 14-19. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Coverage and uptake of systematic postal screening for genital Chlamydia trachomatis and prevalence of infection in the United Kingdom general population: cross sectional study
John Macleod, Chris Salisbury, Nicola Low, Anne McCarthy, Jonathan A C Sterne, Aisha Holloway, Rita Patel, Emma Sanford, Andrea Morcom, Paddy Horner, George Davey Smith, Susan Skidmore, Alan Herring, Owen Caul, F D Richard Hobbs, and Matthias Egger
BMJ 2005 330: 940. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Land, J.A., Van Bergen, J.E.A.M., Morre, S.A., Postma, M.J. (2009). Epidemiology of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in women and the cost-effectiveness of screening. Hum Reprod Update 0: dmp035v1-dmp035 [Abstract] [Full text]  

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Not just 'dynamic': intergenerational outcomes.
Woody Caan
bmj.com, 11 Aug 2007 [Full text]
Cost effectiveness of chlamydia screening
Ian Simms, et al.
bmj.com, 6 Sep 2007 [Full text]
Time to think again about chlamydia screening?
Tracy E Roberts, et al.
bmj.com, 21 Sep 2007 [Full text]
Access jobs at BMJ Careers
Whats new online at Student BMJ