Long-term cost-effectiveness of screening for fracture risk in a UK primary care setting: the SCOOP study.
Cost-effectiveness
FRAX
Fracture risk assessment
Randomized controlled trial
UK
Journal
Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA
ISSN: 1433-2965
Titre abrégé: Osteoporos Int
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9100105
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2020
Aug 2020
Historique:
received:
02
12
2019
accepted:
28
02
2020
pubmed:
3
4
2020
medline:
18
2
2021
entrez:
3
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Community-based screening and treatment of women aged 70-85 years at high fracture risk reduced fractures; moreover, the screening programme was cost-saving. The results support a case for a screening programme of fracture risk in older women in the UK. The SCOOP (screening for prevention of fractures in older women) randomized controlled trial investigated whether community-based screening could reduce fractures in women aged 70-85 years. The objective of this study was to estimate the long-term cost-effectiveness of screening for fracture risk in a UK primary care setting compared with usual management, based on the SCOOP study. A health economic Markov model was used to predict the life-time consequences in terms of costs and quality of life of the screening programme compared with the control arm. The model was populated with costs related to drugs, administration and screening intervention derived from the SCOOP study. Fracture risk reduction in the screening arm compared with the usual management arm was derived from SCOOP. Modelled fracture risk corresponded to the risk observed in SCOOP. Screening of 1000 patients saved 9 hip fractures and 20 non-hip fractures over the remaining lifetime (mean 14 years) compared with usual management. In total, the screening arm saved costs (£286) and gained 0.015 QALYs/patient in comparison with usual management arm. This analysis suggests that a screening programme of fracture risk in older women in the UK would gain quality of life and life years, and reduce fracture costs to more than offset the cost of running the programme.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32239237
doi: 10.1007/s00198-020-05372-6
pii: 10.1007/s00198-020-05372-6
pmc: PMC7115896
mid: EMS86781
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1499-1506Subventions
Organisme : Versus Arthritis
ID : 17702
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Versus Arthritis
ID : 21231
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_UU_12011/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : G0601019
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/P020941/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Investigateurs
A Heawood
(A)
N Crabtree
(N)
H Duffy
(H)
N Gittoes
(N)
J Parle
(J)
F Rashid
(F)
K Stant
(K)
K Taylor
(K)
C Thomas
(C)
E Knox
(E)
C Tenneson
(C)
H Williams
(H)
D Adams
(D)
V Bion
(V)
J Blacklock
(J)
T Dyer
(T)
R Fong-Soe-Khioe
(R)
E Lenaghan
(E)
S Bratherton
(S)
M Fidler
(M)
K Knight
(K)
C McGurk
(C)
K Smith
(K)
S Young
(S)
K Collins
(K)
J Cushnaghan
(J)
C Arundel
(C)
K Bell
(K)
L Clark
(L)
S Collins
(S)
S Gardner
(S)
N Mitchell
(N)
D Torgeson
(D)
Références
Arch Intern Med. 1997 Oct 13;157(18):2121-5
pubmed: 9382669
J Bone Miner Res. 2016 Jan;31(1):16-35
pubmed: 26350171
Osteoporos Int. 2018 Mar;29(3):567-578
pubmed: 29218381
Diabetes Care. 2002 Jun;25(6):1022-6
pubmed: 12032109
BMJ. 2016 Jun 28;353:i3365
pubmed: 27353596
Arch Osteoporos. 2013;8:137
pubmed: 24113838
Arch Osteoporos. 2013;8:144
pubmed: 24030479
Osteoporos Int. 2017 Dec;28(12):3389-3399
pubmed: 28875257
Osteoporos Int. 2019 Jun;30(6):1223-1233
pubmed: 30911782
Osteoporos Int. 2008 Apr;19(4):385-97
pubmed: 18292978
Bone. 2003 May;32(5):468-73
pubmed: 12753862
Osteoporos Int. 2006 Dec;17(12):1781-93
pubmed: 17009083
J Bone Miner Res. 2018 May;33(5):845-851
pubmed: 29470854
Osteoporos Int. 2007 Aug;18(8):1047-61
pubmed: 17333449
Arch Osteoporos. 2017 Dec;12(1):43
pubmed: 28425085
Osteoporos Int. 2008 Nov;19(11):1613-20
pubmed: 18483689
Public Health. 1991 Nov;105(6):443-6
pubmed: 1803403
Osteoporos Int. 2010 Apr;21(4):561-8
pubmed: 19565176
JAMA. 2006 Dec 27;296(24):2927-38
pubmed: 17190893
Osteoporos Int. 2019 Jan;30(1):3-44
pubmed: 30324412
Lancet. 2018 Feb 24;391(10122):741-747
pubmed: 29254858
Osteoporos Int. 1999;10(3):193-9
pubmed: 10525710
Osteoporos Int. 2007 Aug;18(8):1033-46
pubmed: 17323110
Am J Med. 2013 Jan;126(1):13-20
pubmed: 23177553
Osteoporos Int. 2018 Aug;29(8):1747-1757
pubmed: 29947869
Value Health. 2012 Mar-Apr;15(2):284-98
pubmed: 22433760
J Med Econ. 2011;14(1):99-107
pubmed: 21222505
Bone. 2012 Sep;51(3):324-31
pubmed: 22684000
J Bone Miner Res. 2004 Aug;19(8):1259-69
pubmed: 15231012
BMC Public Health. 2011 Jul 28;11:603
pubmed: 21798046
J Bone Miner Res. 2018 Jul;33(7):1252-1259
pubmed: 29529334
Osteoporos Int. 2011 Mar;22(3):967-82
pubmed: 20936401