Cost–benefit analysis of Helicobacter pylori screening

• Published in: Health policy (Amsterdam) 2004-10, Vol.70 (1), p.85-96
• Main Authors: Leivo, T, Salomaa, A, Kosunen, T.U, Tuominen, R, Färkkilä, M, Linna, M, Sintonen, H
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Cancer; Cost; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Costs; Cost–benefit; Economic aspects; Economics; Finland; Health; Health administration; Health economics; Health Policy; Helicobacter Infections - diagnosis; Helicobacter pylori; Helicobacter pylori - isolation & purification; Humans; Mass Screening - economics; Medical economics; Medical service; Medicine, Preventive; Middle Aged; Policy studies; Prevention; Public health; Screening; Sensitivity and Specificity
• ISSN: 0168-8510; 1872-6054
• DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2004.02.004

Background: Helicobacter pylori screening may markedly reduce mortality and morbidity in the decades ahead. Aims: This study explores the costs and benefits of population-based H. pylori screening in terms of health care cost taking into account all relevant H. pylori-related diseases. Material and methods: The computer-based decision analysis compared two strategies: (1) screen for H. pylori and treat those individuals who test positive, and (2) do not screen for H. pylori, and test and treat H. pylori only if related clinical symptoms appear. The model estimated the discounted H. pylori-related accumulative health care costs from screening age to death in both strategies. The baseline case estimates cost–benefit for screenees aged 15–45 years. The main outcome measure is the incremental health care cost per case in the screening compared with the no-screening alternative. The probability estimates were obtained from the Finnish Vammala H. pylori screen and treat project, including 5288 subjects in the years 1996–1998, published studies, national statistics and hospitals’ internal accounts. Results: The incremental cost per case was US$ 26 in the screening compared with the no-screening alternative. It was lowest in the group aged 45 years, where H. pylori screening showed cost savings per case. Conclusions: H. pylori screening is more favourable in the older age cohorts. The estimated cost per screenee can be considered to be very acceptable if the current pathophysiological evidence on the potential effects of H. pylori eradication are confirmed in the future. However, there is uncertainty about the possible negative effect of eradicating H. pylori infection on gastro-esophageal reflux disease and esophageal adenocarcinoma. This could change the balance of benefits against risks of eradicating H. pylori infection.