Women's Health Issues
Volume 20, Issue 1 , Pages 35-42, January 2010

Impact of Patient Adherence and Test Performance on the Cost-Effectiveness of Cervical Cancer Screening in Developing Countries:

The Case of Honduras

  • Rebecca B. Perkins, MD, MSc

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Boston University Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence to: Rebecca B. Perkins, MD, MSc, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Boston University Medical Center, 85 E. Concord St. 6th Floor, Boston, MA 02118; Phone: 617-414-5993; Fax: 617-414-7303.
  • ,
  • Sarah M. Langrish, NP

      Affiliations

    • Emma Romero de Callejas Centro de Cancer, Tegucigalpa, Honduras
  • ,
  • Linda J. Stern, MPH

      Affiliations

    • Brigham and Women's Hospital- PROMESA project, Boston, Massachusetts
  • ,
  • James F. Burgess, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Health Policy and Management, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
  • ,
  • Carol J. Simon, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Health Policy and Management, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts

Received 9 April 2009; received in revised form 4 September 2009; accepted 9 September 2009. published online 30 November 2009.

Objective

We examined the impact of patient adherence and screening test performance on the cost-effectiveness of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) and Pap smears when used with colposcopy for diagnosis.

Materials and Methods

Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using computer modeling. The primary outcome was cancer prevalence in the 10 years after screening. Three hypothetical populations of 35-year-old women were compared: never-screened women, women screened with VIA, and women screened with Pap smears. We used community-based data from our screening program in Honduras to estimate screening test sensitivity and specificity, adherence to follow-up, and costs of screening and colposcopy services. Published data were used to model disease outcomes.

Results

VIA was more sensitive than Pap smears (70% vs. 4%), less expensive (U.S. $0.23 vs. $3.17), and the 2-vist VIA system had a higher rate of adherence to follow-up than the 3-visit Pap smear system (84% vs. 38%). VIA had a higher false-positive rate than Pap smears resulting in higher colposcopy referral rates, but more dysplasia was detected and treated. Cost-effectiveness analysis revealed that screening with VIA would cost U.S. $3,198 per cancer case avoided and reduce cancer cases by 42%, versus U.S. $36,802 and 2% for Pap screening. Although Pap smear quality was low in Honduras, sensitivity analysis showed that VIA was more cost-effective than Pap smears, even when test accuracy was equivalent.

Conclusion

In developing countries, systems barriers can limit the cost-effectiveness of Pap smears. VIA may be a cost-effective alternative for some resource-poor settings, although systems barriers, quality control, and feasibility issues must be considered.

 

 Funding for the cervical cancer prevention project from which primary data was gathered was provided by the Alliance for Cervical Cancer Prevention Small Grants Program. Funding for research was provided by the Building Interdisciplinary Careers in Women's Health (BIRCWH) Scholar Program K12-HD43444.

PII: S1049-3867(09)00102-9

doi:10.1016/j.whi.2009.09.001

Women's Health Issues
Volume 20, Issue 1 , Pages 35-42, January 2010