Modeling the costs and long-term health benefits of screening the general population for risks of cardiovascular disease: a review of methods used in the literature

David Epstein, Leticia García-Mochón, Stephen Kaptoge and Simon G. Thompson
Additional contact information
Leticia García-Mochón: Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública
Stephen Kaptoge: University of Cambridge
Simon G. Thompson: University of Cambridge

The European Journal of Health Economics, 2016, vol. 17, issue 8, No 11, 1053 pages

Abstract: Abstract Background Strategies for screening and intervening to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in primary care settings need to be assessed in terms of both their costs and long-term health effects. We undertook a literature review to investigate the methodologies used. Methods In a framework of developing a new health-economic model for evaluating different screening strategies for primary prevention of CVD in Europe (EPIC-CVD project), we identified seven key modeling issues and reviewed papers published between 2000 and 2013 to assess how they were addressed. Results We found 13 relevant health-economic modeling studies of screening to prevent CVD in primary care. The models varied in their degree of complexity, with between two and 33 health states. Programmes that screen the whole population by a fixed cut-off (e.g., predicted 10-year CVD risk >20 %) identify predominantly elderly people, who may not be those most likely to benefit from long-term treatment. Uncertainty and model validation were generally poorly addressed. Few studies considered the disutility of taking drugs in otherwise healthy individuals or the budget impact of the programme. Conclusions Model validation, incorporation of parameter uncertainty, and sensitivity analyses for assumptions made are all important components of model building and reporting, and deserve more attention. Complex models may not necessarily give more accurate predictions. Availability of a large enough source dataset to reliably estimate all relevant input parameters is crucial for achieving credible results. Decision criteria should consider budget impact and the medicalization of the population as well as cost-effectiveness thresholds.

Keywords: Cost-effectiveness analysis; Screening; Cardiovascular disease; Primary prevention; Statins; Literature review (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: H51 I18 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-015-0753-2 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:17:y:2016:i:8:d:10.1007_s10198-015-0753-2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... cs/journal/10198/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s10198-015-0753-2

Access Statistics for this article

The European Journal of Health Economics is currently edited by J.-M.G.v.d. Schulenburg

More articles in The European Journal of Health Economics from Springer, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().