Objective: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of mailing a human papillomavirus self-sampling (HPV-ss) kit, directly or via invitation to order, compared with mailing reminder letters among long-term non-attenders in Norway.
Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis using the Equalscreen study data with 6000 women aged 35-69 years who had not screened in 10+ years. Participants were equally randomized into three arms: reminder letter (control); invitation to order HPV-ss kit (opt-in); directly mailed HPV-ss kit (send-to-all). Cost-effectiveness (2020 Great British Pounds (GBP)) was estimated using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per additional screened woman, and per additional cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) from extended and direct healthcare perspectives.
Results: Participation, CIN2+ detection, and total screening costs were highest in the send-to-all arm, followed by the opt-in and control arms. Non-histological physician appointments contributed to 67% of the total costs in the control arm and ≤ 31% in the self-sampling arms. From an expanded healthcare perspective, the ICERs were 135 GBP and 169 GBP per additional screened woman, and 2864 GBP and 4165 GBP per additional CIN2+ detected for the opt-in and send-to-all, respectively.
Conclusions: Opt-in and send-to-all self-sampling were more effective and, depending on willingness-to-pay, may be considered cost-effective alternatives to improve screening attendance in Norway.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2022.10.027 | DOI Listing |
Int J Cancer
September 2024
Department of Research, Cancer Registry of Norway, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
With the objective to investigate associations between sociodemographic characteristics and participation in interventions designed to increase participation in cervical cancer screening among under-screened women, we randomized a random sample of 6000 women in Norway aged 35-69 years who had not attended cervical screening for ≥10 years to receive either (i) a reminder to attend regular screening (control), (ii) an offer to order a self-sampling kit (opt-in), or (iii) a self-sampling kit unsolicited (send-to-all). We analyzed how sociodemographic characteristics were associated with screening participation within and between screening arms. In the send-to-all arm, increased screening participation ranged from 17.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBr J Cancer
March 2023
Unit of Cancer Epidemiology, Belgian Cancer Centre, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
Gynecol Oncol
January 2023
Department of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Postboks 1089 Blindern, 0317 Oslo, Norway; Harvard Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, 718 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address:
Objective: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of mailing a human papillomavirus self-sampling (HPV-ss) kit, directly or via invitation to order, compared with mailing reminder letters among long-term non-attenders in Norway.
Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis using the Equalscreen study data with 6000 women aged 35-69 years who had not screened in 10+ years. Participants were equally randomized into three arms: reminder letter (control); invitation to order HPV-ss kit (opt-in); directly mailed HPV-ss kit (send-to-all).
Br J Cancer
November 2022
Department of Research, Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway.
Background: Cervical cancer screening participation is suboptimal in most settings. We assessed whether human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling may increase screening participation among long-term non-attenders in Norway.
Methods: A pragmatic randomised controlled trial with participation as the primary outcome was initiated in the national cervical screening programme in March 2019.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!