Quantifying the cost savings and health impacts of improving colonoscopy quality: an economic evaluation.

To estimate and quantify the cost implications and health impacts of improving the performance of English endoscopy services to the optimum quality as defined by postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) rates. A semi-Markov state-transition model was constructed, following the logical treatment pathway of individuals who could potentially undergo a diagnostic colonoscopy. The model consisted of three identical arms, each representing a high, middle or low-performing trust's endoscopy service, defined by PCCRC rates. A cohort of 40-year-old individuals was simulated in each arm of the model. The model's time horizon was when the cohort reached 90 years of age and the total costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated for all trusts. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were also conducted. A 40-year-old individual gains 0.0006 QALYs and savings of £6.75 over the model lifetime by attending a high-performing trust compared with attending a middle-performing trust and gains 0.0012 QALYs and savings of £14.64 compared with attending a low-performing trust. For the population of England aged between 40 and 86, if all low and middle-performing trusts were improved to the level of a high-performing trust, QALY gains of 14 044 and cost savings of £249 311 295 are possible. Higher quality trusts dominated lower quality trusts; any improvement in the PCCRC rate was cost-effective. Improving the quality of endoscopy services would lead to QALY gains among the population, in addition to cost savings to the healthcare provider. If all middle and low-performing trusts were improved to the level of a high-performing trust, our results estimate that the English National Health Service would save approximately £5 million per year.

Informations de copyright

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interests: MDR reports paid leadership or fiduciary roles in other board, society, committee or advocacy group for UK National Endoscopy Database committee, UK Joint Advisory Group for GI Endoscopy and NHS England. LS reports research funding from Medtronic and 3D-Matrix. MB reports research funding from NIHR Health Technology Assessment, support for attending meeting and/or travel from Janssen Pharma and participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Norgine Pharma, Vifor Pharma and GE Healthcare.