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

Abstract Objective:To assess the cost effectiveness of ultrasound screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms. Design: Primary analysis: four year cost effectiveness analysis based directly on results from a randomised controlled trial in which patients were individually allocated to invitation to ultr...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	BMJ 2002-11, Vol.325 (7373), p.1135-1138
Main Author:	Multicentre Aneurysm Screening Study Group
Format:	Article
Language:	eng
Subjects:	Abdominal aortic aneurysm Aged Aneurysms Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - diagnostic imaging Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal - economics Cost analysis Cost control Cost effectiveness analysis Cost efficiency Cost estimates Cost-Benefit Analysis Death Follow-Up Studies Forecasting Health Resources - statistics & numerical data Humans Male Mass Screening - economics Mass Screening - methods Mortality Sensitivity and Specificity Time Factors Ultrasonography Unit costs
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	Abstract Objective:To assess the cost effectiveness of ultrasound screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms. Design: Primary analysis: four year cost effectiveness analysis based directly on results from a randomised controlled trial in which patients were individually allocated to invitation to ultrasound screening (intervention) or to a control group not offered screening. Secondary analysis: projection of the data, based on conservative assumptions, to indicate likely cost effectiveness at 10 years. Setting:Four centres in the United Kingdom. Screening delivered in primary care settings with follow up and surgery offered in the main hospitals Participants: Population based sample of 67 800 men aged 65-74 years. Main outcome measures:Mortality from and costs (screening, follow up, elective and emergency surgery) related to abdominal aortic aneurysm; cost per life year gained. Results:Over four years there were 47 fewer deaths related to abdominal aortic aneurysms in the screening group than in the control group, but the additional costs incurred were £2.2m. After adjustment for censoring and discounted at 6% the mean additional cost of the screening programme was £63.39 ($97.77, €100.48) (95% confidence interval £53.31 to £73.48) per patient. The hazard ratio for abdominal aortic aneurysm was 0.58 (0.42 to 0.78). Over four years the mean incremental cost effectiveness ratio for screening was £28 400 (£15 000 to £146 000) per life year gained, equivalent to about £36 000 per quality adjusted life year. After 10 years this figure is estimated to fall to around £8000 per life year gained. Conclusions:Even at four years the cost effectiveness of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms is at the margin of acceptability according to current NHS thresholds. Over a longer period the cost effectiveness will improve substantially, the predicted ratio at 10 years falling to around a quarter of the four year figure.
ISSN:	0959-8138 1468-5833 1756-1833