Cost-effectiveness of a stepwise intervention to promote adherence to cervical cancer screening
Menée au Portugal, cette étude compare le rapport coût-efficacité de quatre interventions, basées sur l'envoi d'une lettre, l'envoi d'un texto, des appels téléphoniques ou des entretiens en face à face, pour favoriser l'adhésion au dépistage du cancer du col utérin
Background : Cervical cancer screening is effective in reducing mortality, but adherence is generally low. We aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of a stepwise intervention to promote adherence to cervical cancer screening in Portugal.
Methods : We developed a decision tree model to compare the cost-effectiveness of four competing interventions to increase adherence to cervical cancer screening: (i) a written letter (standard-of-care); (ii) automated short message service text messages (SMS)/phone calls/reminders; (iii) automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls; (iv) automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls + face-to-face interviews. The main outcome measure was cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) measured over a 5-year time horizon. Costs were calculated from the societal and provider perspectives.
Results : From the societal perspective, the optimal strategy was automated SMS/phone calls/reminders, below a threshold of €8171 per QALY; above this and below €180 878 per QALY, the most cost-effective strategy was automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls and above this value automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls + face-to-face interviews. From the provider perspective, the ranking of the three strategies in terms of cost-effectiveness was the same, for thresholds of €2756 and €175 463 per QALY, respectively.
Conclusions : Assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of one time the national gross domestic product (€22 398/QALY), automated SMS/phone calls/reminders + manual phone calls is a cost-effective strategy to promote adherence to cervical cancer screening, both from the societal and provider perspectives.
European Journal of Public Health , résumé, 2018