首页> 外文期刊>Sexually transmitted diseases >Serologic testing for syphilis in the United States: a cost-effectiveness analysis of two screening algorithms.
【24h】

Serologic testing for syphilis in the United States: a cost-effectiveness analysis of two screening algorithms.

机译:在美国进行梅毒血清学检测:两种筛查算法的成本效益分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

BACKGROUND: The introduction of automated treponemal enzyme immunoassays and chemiluminescence assays (EIA/CA) tests has led some laboratories in the United States to use new syphilis screening algorithms that start with a treponemal test. We compared the economic and health outcomes of this new algorithm with the standard algorithm from the perspective of the United States health system. METHODS: We used a cohort decision analysis to estimate the expected costs and effects (including follow-ups and overtreatment) of the 2 algorithms from a health-care system perspective. In the standard algorithm, rapid plasma reagin (RPR) is followed (if reactive) by EIA/CA (Nontreponemal-First). In the new algorithm, EIA/CA is followed (if reactive) by RPR. If the RPR is negative, Treponema pallidum passive particle agglutination assay (TP-PA) test is used (Treponemal-First). RESULTS: For a cohort of 200,000 individuals (1000 current infections and 10,000 previous infections), the net costs were Dollars 1.6 m (Treponemal-First) and Dollars 1.4 m (Nontreponemal-First). The Treponemal-First option treated 118 more cases (986 vs. 868) but resulted in a substantially higher number of follow-ups (11,450 vs. 3756) and overtreatment (964 vs. 38). Treating the additional 118 cases might prevent 1 case of tertiary syphilis. The estimated cost-effectiveness ratios were Dollars 1671 (Treponemal-First) and Dollars 1621 (Nontreponemal-First) per case treated. The overtreatment was a function of the specificity of the EIA/CA and the lack of independence of EIA/CA and TP-PA. CONCLUSION: The Treponemal-First option costs slightly more and results in more unnecessary treatment.
机译:背景:自动化的梅毒酶免疫测定法和化学发光测定法(EIA / CA)的引入使美国的一些实验室开始使用以梅毒测试法开头的新型梅毒筛查算法。从美国卫生系统的角度,我们将这种新算法的经济和健康结果与标准算法进行了比较。方法:我们使用队列决策分析从卫生保健系统的角度估计了两种算法的预期成本和效果(包括随访和过度治疗)。在标准算法中,EIA / CA(非鼻咽第一)遵循快速血浆反应(RPR)(如果有反应)。在新算法中,RPR跟随EIA / CA(如果是反应性的话)。如果RPR阴性,则使用梅毒螺旋体被动粒子凝集分析(TP-PA)测试(Treponemal-First)。结果:对于一组200,000个人(当前感染1000和以前感染10,000),其净成本分别为160万美元(Treponemal-First)和140万美元(Nontreponemal-First)。 Treponemal-First方案治疗了118例以上的病例(986比868),但导致大量的随访(11,450对3756)和过度治疗(964对38)。治疗另外118例可预防1例三期梅毒。估计的成本效益比为每例治疗的1671美元(Treponemal-First)和1621美元(Nontreponemal-First)。过度治疗取决于EIA / CA的特异性以及EIA / CA和TP-PA缺乏独立性。结论:Treponemal-First方案的费用略高,并导致更多不必要的治疗。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号