Expanded screening for HIV in the United States--an analysis of cost-effectiveness.
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND Although the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommend routine HIV counseling, testing, and referral (HIVCTR) in settings with at least a 1 percent prevalence of HIV, roughly 280,000 Americans are unaware of their human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. The effect of expanded screening for HIV is unknown in the era of effective antiretroviral therapy. METHODS We developed a computer simulation model of HIV screening and treatment to compare routine, voluntary HIVCTR with current practice in three target populations: "high-risk" (3.0 percent prevalence of undiagnosed HIV infection; 1.2 percent annual incidence); "CDC threshold" (1.0 percent and 0.12 percent, respectively); and "U.S. general" (0.1 percent and 0.01 percent). Input data were derived from clinical trials and observational cohorts. Outcomes included quality-adjusted survival, cost, and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS In the high-risk population, the addition of one-time screening for HIV antibodies with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to current practice was associated with earlier diagnosis of HIV (mean CD4 cell count at diagnosis, 210 vs. 154 per cubic millimeter). One-time screening also improved average survival time among HIV-infected patients (quality-adjusted survival, 220.7 months vs. 219.8 months). The incremental cost-effectiveness was 36,000 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Testing every five years cost 50,000 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year gained, and testing every three years cost 63,000 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year gained. In the CDC threshold population, the cost-effectiveness ratio for one-time screening with ELISA was 38,000 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year gained, whereas testing every five years cost 71,000 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year gained, and testing every three years cost 85,000 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year gained. In the U.S. general population, one-time screening cost 113,000 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year gained. CONCLUSIONS In all but the lowest-risk populations, routine, voluntary screening for HIV once every three to five years is justified on both clinical and cost-effectiveness grounds. One-time screening in the general population may also be cost-effective.
منابع مشابه
Expanded HIV screening in the United States: effect on clinical outcomes, HIV transmission, and costs.
BACKGROUND An extensive literature supports expanded HIV screening in the United States. However, the question of whom to test and how frequently remains controversial. OBJECTIVE To inform the design of HIV screening programs by identifying combinations of screening frequency and HIV prevalence and incidence at which screening is cost-effective. DESIGN Cost-effectiveness analysis linking si...
متن کاملThe cost-effectiveness and population outcomes of expanded HIV screening and antiretroviral treatment in the United States.
BACKGROUND Although recent guidelines call for expanded routine screening for HIV, resources for antiretroviral therapy (ART) are limited, and all eligible persons are not currently receiving treatment. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effects on the U.S. HIV epidemic of expanded ART, HIV screening, or interventions to reduce risk behavior. DESIGN Dynamic mathematical model of HIV transmission and...
متن کاملCost effectiveness analysis of antenatal HIV screening in United Kingdom.
OBJECTIVE To assess the cost effectiveness of universal antenatal HIV screening compared with selective screening in the United Kingdom. DESIGN Incremental cost effectiveness analysis relating additional costs of screening to life years gained. Maternal and paediatric costs and life years were combined. SETTING United Kingdom. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Number of districts for which universal ...
متن کاملCost-effectiveness of HIV interventions: from cohort studies and clinical trials to policy.
Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios quantify the additional cost of an intervention relative to the additional benefit associated with its use. Whether an intervention is considered cost-effective depends largely on policy decisions regarding whether the additional benefit is worth the additional cost in the context of competing needs for resources. In the United States, costeffectiveness ana...
متن کاملImpact of nursing-centered HIV testing using standing orders in RI.
1. Costello JF, Sliney A, Macleod C, et al. Implementation of Routine HIV Testing in an Acute Care Hospital in Rhode Island: A Nurse-Initiated Opt-Out Pilot Project. J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care. 2013 Sep-Oct;24(5):460-8. 2. HCUP net. Information on stays in hospitals for participating states from the HCUP State Inpatient Databases. 3. Walensky RP, Weinstein MC, Kimmel AD, et al. Routine human immu...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- The New England journal of medicine
دوره 352 6 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2005