Cost analysis of the national breast and cervical cancer early detection program: Selected States, 2003 to 2004

Cancer

Volumn 112, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 626-635

  Ekwueme, Donatus U ^a   Gardner, James G ^a   Subramanian, Sujha ^b   Tangka, Florence K ^a   Bapat, Bela ^b   Richardson, Lisa C ^a  

^a NATIONAL CENTER FOR CHRONIC DISEASE PREVENTION AND HEALTH PROMOTION   (United States)

^b RTI INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Cervical cancer; Cost analysis; National breast and cervical cancer early detection program; Screening

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; LOWEST INCOME GROUP; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MONEY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HEALTH CARE SURVEYS; HEALTH SERVICES NEEDS AND DEMAND; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; UNITED STATES; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 38749151914     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.23207     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. US Cancer Statistics Working Group. United States Cancer Statistics: 2003 Incidence and Mortality. Atlanta, Ga: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Cancer Institute; 2006. Available from URL: www.cdc.gov/cancer/npcr/npcrpdfs/ US_Cancer_Statistics_2003_Incidence_and_Mortality.pdf Accessed April 13, 2007.
2. Ryerson AB, Bernard VB, Major AC. National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program: 1991-2002 National Report. Atlanta, Ga: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2005. Available from URL: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/nbccedp/Reports/NationalReports/ index.htm Accessed on January 20, 2007.
3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. Available from URL: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/nbccedp/about.htm Accessed January 20, 2007.
4. Greene JC, Caracelli VJ, Graham WF. Toward a conceptual framework for mixed method evaluation designs, Educ Eval Policy Anal. 1989;11:255-274.
5. French MT, Roebuck MC, McLellan AT. Cost estimation when time and resources are limited: the Brief DATCAP. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2004;27:187-193.
6. French MT, Dunlap LJ, Zarkin GA, McGeary KA, McLellan AT. A structured instrument for estimating the economic cost of drug abuse treatment.The Drug Abuse Treatment Cost Analysis Program (DATCAP). J Subst Abuse Treat. 1997;14:445-455.
7. Salome HJ, French MT, Miller M, McLellan AT. Estimating the client costs of addiction treatment: first findings from the client drug abuse treatment cost analysis program (Client DATCAP). Drug Alcohol Depend. 2003;71:195-206.
8. Haddix AC, Corso PA, Gorsky DR. Costs. In: Haddix AC, Teutsch SM, Corso PA, eds. Prevention Effectiveness: A Guide to Decision Analysis and Economic Evaluation, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2003:53-76.
9. Kerlinger FN. Foundations of Behavioral Research, 3rd ed. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston; 1986.
10. Eheman CR, Benard VB, Blackman D, et al. Breast cancer screening among low-income or uninsured women: results from the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, July 1995 to March 2002 (United States). Cancer Causes Control. 2006;17:29-38.
11. Benard VB, Eheman CR, Lawson HW, et al. Cervical screening in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, 1995-2001. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103:564-571.
12. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell L.B, Weinstein MC. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1996.
13. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. Policies and Procedures Manual. Atlanta, Ga: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2005.
14. Critchfield GC, Willard KE. Probabilistic analysis of decision trees using Monte Carlo simulation. Med Decis Making. 1986;6:85-92.
15. Doubilet P, Begg CB, Weinstein MC, Braun P, McNeil BJ. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulation. A practical approach. Med Decis Making. 1985;5:157-177.
16. Dittus RS, Roberts SD, Wilson JR. Quantifying uncertainty in medical decisions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1989;14(3 suppl A):23A-28A.
17. Benoit RM, Naslund MJ. An economic rationale for prostate cancer screening. Urology. 1994;44:795-803.
18. O'Malley AS, Lawrence W, Liang W, et al. Feasibility of mobile cancer screening and prevention. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2002;13:298-319.
19. Rubin E, Mennemeyer ST, Desmond RA, et al. Reducing the cost of diagnosis of breast carcinoma: impact of ultrasound and imaging-guided biopsies on a clinical breast practice. Cancer. 2001;91:324-332.
20. Lindfors KK, Rosenquist CJ. The cost-effectiveness of mammographic screening strategies. JAMA. 1995;274:881-884.
21. Salzmann P, Kerlikowske K, Phillips K. Cost-effectiveness of extending screening mammography guidelines to include women 40 to 49 years of age. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:955-965.
22. Mandelblatt JS, Schechter CB, Yabroff KR, et al. Toward optimal screening strategies for older women. Costs, benefits, and harms of breast cancer screening by age, biology, and health status. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20:487-496.
23. Helms LJ, Melnikow J. Determining costs of health care services for cost-effectiveness analyses: the case of cervical cancer prevention and treatment. Med Care. 1999;37:652-661.
24. Maxwell GL, Carlson JW, Ochoa M, Krivak T, Rose GS, Myers ER. Costs and effectiveness of alternative strategies for cervical cancer screening in military beneficiaries. Obstet Gynecol 2002;100:740-748.
25. Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Womack SM, et al. Benefits and costs of using HPV testing to screen for cervical cancer. JAMA. 2002;287:2372-2381.
26. Kulasingam SL, Myers ER. Potential health and economic impact of adding a human papillomavirus vaccine to screening programs. JAMA. 2003;290:781-789.
27. Fetters MD, Lieberman RW, Abrahamse PH, Sanghvi RV, Sonnad SS. Cost-effectiveness of Pap smear screening for vaginal cancer after total hysterectomy for benign disease. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2003;7:194-202.
28. Goldie SJ, Kim JJ, Wright TC. Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening in women aged 30 years or more. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103:619-631.
29. Schweitzer ME, French MT, Ullmann SG, McCoy CB. Cost-effectiveness of detecting breast cancer in lower socioeconomic status African American and Hispanic women through mobile mammography services. Med Care Res Rev. 1998;55:99-115.
30. Hurley SF, Livingston PM, Thane N, Quang L. Mammographic screening: measurement of the cost in a population based programme in Victoria, Australia. J Epidemiol Commun Health. 1994;48:391-399.
31. Gerard K, Salkeld G, Hall J. Counting the costs of mammography screening: first year results from the Sydney study. Med J Aust. 1990;152:466, 469-471.
32. Bonfill X, Marzo M, Pladevall M, Marti J, Emparanza JI. Strategies for increasing women participation in community breast cancer screening. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;1:CD002943.
33. Legler J, Meissner HI, Coyne C, Breen N, Chollette V, Rimer BK. The effectiveness of interventions to promote mammography among women with historically lower rates of screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002;11:59-71.
34. Marcus AC, Crane LA. A review of cervical cancer screening intervention research: implications for public health programs and future research. Prev Med. 1998;27:13-31.
35. Meissner HI, Breen N, Coyne C, Legler JM, Green D, Edwards BK. Breast and cervical cancer screening interventions: an assessment of the literature. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1998;7:951-961.
36. Snell JL, Buck EL. Increasing cancer screening: a meta-analysis. Prev Med. 1996;25:702-707.
37. Stone EG, Morton SC, Hulscher ME, et al. Interventions that increase use of adult immunization and cancer screening services: a meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:641-651.
38. Yabroff KR, Mandelblatt JS. Interventions targeted toward patients to increase mammography use. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1999;8:749-757.
39. Breen N, Wagener DK, Brown ML, Davis WW, Ballard-Barbash R. Progress in cancer screening over a decade: results of cancer screening from the 1987, 1992, and 1998 National Health Interview Surveys. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93:1704-1713.
40. Fajardo LL, Saint-Germain M, Meakem TJ 3rd, Rose C, Hillman BJ. Factors influencing women to undergo screening mammography. Radiology. 1992;184:59-63.
41. Mandelblatt JS, Gold K, O'Malley AS, et al. Breast and cervix cancer screening among multiethnic women: role of age, health, and source of care. Prev Med. 1998;28:418-425.
42. Friedman LC, Woodruff A, Lane M, Weinberg AD, Cooper HP, Webb JA. Breast cancer screening behaviors and intentions among asymptomatic women 50 years of age and older. Am J Prev Med. 1995;11:219-223.
43. Haggerty J, Tamblyn R, Abrahamowicz M, Beaulieu MD, Kishchuk N. Screening mammography referral rates for women ages 50 to 69 years by recently licensed family physicians: physician and practice environment correlates. Prev Med. 1999;29:391-404.
44. Frazier EL, Jiles RB, Mayberry R. Use of screening mammography and clinical breast examinations among black, Hispanic, and white women. Prev Med. 1996;25:118-125.
45. Lane DS, Zapka J, Breen N, Messina CR, Fotheringham DJ. A systems model of clinical preventive care: the case of breast cancer screening among older women. For the NCI Breast Cancer Screening Consortium. Prev Med. 2000;31:481-493.