Multicentre aneurysm screening study (MASS): Cost effectiveness analysis of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms based on four year results from randomised controlled trial

British Medical Journal

Volumn 325, Issue 7373, 2002, Pages 1135-1138

  Buxton, Martin J ^a   Ashton, H A ^a   Campbell, H E ^a   Day, N E ^a   Kim, L G ^a   Marteau, T M ^a   Scott, R A P ^a   Thompson, S G ^a  

^a BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL AORTA ANEURYSM; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECHOGRAPHY; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MASS SCREENING; MORTALITY; MULTICENTER STUDY; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; UNITED KINGDOM;

AGED; AORTIC ANEURYSM, ABDOMINAL; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; FORECASTING; HEALTH RESOURCES; HUMANS; MALE; MASS SCREENING; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 0037121382     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Lindholt JS,Juul S, Fastin H. Henneberg EW. Hospital costs and benefits of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms. Results from a randomised population screening trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2002;23:55-60.
2. Collin J. The value of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm by ultrasound. In: Greenholgh RM, Mamaid JA. eds. The Causes and Management of Aneurysms. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 1990:447-56.
3. Frame PS, Fryback DG, Patterson C. Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm in men ages 60 to 80 years. Ann Intern Med 1993;119:411-6.
4. Mason JM, Wakeman AP, Drummond MF, Crump BJ. Population screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm: Do the benefits outweigh the costs? J Public Health Med 1993;15:154-60.
5. Law MR, Morris J, Wald NJ. Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Med Screen 1994;1:110-6.
6. St Leger AS, Spencely M, McColum CN, Mossa M. Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm: A computer assisted cost-utility analysis. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1996;11:183-90.
7. Multicentre Aneurysm Screening Study Group. The multicentre aneurysm screening study (MASS) into the effects of screening on mortality in men: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2002;360:1531-9.
8. Netten A, Rees T, Harrison G. Units Costs of Health and Social Care. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent at Canterbury, 2001.
9. Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy. The Health Service Financial Database and Comparative Tool. Croydon: Institute of Public Finance, 2000.
10. Willan AR, Lin DY. Incremental net benefit in randomised trials. Stat Med 2001;20:1563-74.
11. Heitjan DF. Fieller's method and net health benefits. Health Econ 2000;9:327-35.
12. Van Hout BA. Al MJ, Gordon GS, Rutten FF. Costs, effects and the C/E-ratios alongside a clinical trial. Health Econ 1994;3:309-19.
13. Rafiery J. NICE: Faster access to modern treatments? Analysis of guidance on health technologies. BMJ 2001;323:1300-3.
14. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guidance for Manufacturers and Sponsors. London: NICE, 2001 (Technology Appraisals Process Series No 5).
15. Kind P, Hardman G, Macran S. UK Population Norms for EQ-5D. York: University of York, 1999 (CHE Discussion Paper 172).
16. Forbes JF, Brady AR, Brown LC, Fowkes FGR, Greenhalgh RM, Powell JT, et al. Health service costs and quality of life for early elective surgery or ultrasonographic surveillance for small aortic aneurysms. Lancet 1998;352:1656-60.
17. Jepson RG, Forbes JF, Fowkes FGR for UK Small Aneurysm Trial Participants. Resource use and costs of elective surgery for asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1997;14:143-8.