Biomedical subjects

Nichol M Edwards

Publications and source records attributed to Nichol M Edwards.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Influenza vaccination health impact and cost effectiveness among adults aged 50 to 64 and 65 and older.

BACKGROUND: Influenza causes approximately 36,000 deaths per year in the United States despite the presence of an effective vaccine. This assessment of the value of influenza vaccination to the U.S. population is part of an update to the 2001 ranking of clinical preventive services recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. The forthcoming ranking will include the new recommendation of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to extend influenza vaccination to adults aged 50 to 64 years. METHODS: This service is evaluated on the two most important dimensions: burden of disease prevented and cost effectiveness. Study methods, described in a companion article, are designed to ensure consistency across many services. RESULTS: Over the lifetime of a birth cohort of 4 million, it is estimated that about 275,000 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) would be saved if influenza vaccination were offered annually to all people after age 50. Eighty percent of the QALYs saved (220,000) would be achieved by offering the vaccine only to persons aged 65 and older. In year 2000 dollars, the cost effectiveness of influenza vaccination is $980 per QALY saved in persons aged 65 and older, and $28,000 per QALY saved in persons aged 50 to 64. When the costs of patient time and travel are excluded, the cost effectiveness ratio of vaccinating 50- to 64-year-olds decreases to $7200 per QALY saved, and vaccinating those aged 65 and older saves $17 per person vaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination is a high-impact, cost-effective service for persons aged 65 and older. Vaccinations are also cost effective for persons aged 50 to 64.

Aged↗

PubMed2006

Colorectal cancer screening: health impact and cost effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States, yet recommended screenings are not delivered to most people. This assessment of colorectal cancer screening's value to the U.S. population is part of the update to a 2001 ranking of recommended clinical preventive services found in the accompanying article. This article describes the burden of disease prevented and cost-effectiveness as a result of offering patients a choice of colorectal cancer screening tools. METHODS: Methods used were designed to ensure consistent estimates across many services and are described in more detail in the companion articles. In a secondary analysis, the authors also estimated the impact of increasing offers for colorectal cancer screening above current levels among the current cross-section of adults aged 50 and older. RESULTS: If a birth cohort of 4 million were offered screening at recommended intervals, 31,500 deaths would be prevented and 338,000 years of life would be gained over the lifetime of the birth cohort. In the current cross-section of people aged 50 and older, 18,800 deaths could be prevented each year by offering all people in this group screening at recommended intervals. Only 58% of these deaths are currently being prevented. In year 2000 dollars, the cost effectiveness of offering patients aged 50 and older a choice of colorectal cancer screening options is $11,900 per year of life gained. CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal cancer screening is a high-impact, cost-effective service used by less than half of persons aged 50 and older.

Colonoscopy↗

PubMed2006

Priorities among effective clinical preventive services: methods.

Decision makers want to know which healthcare services matter the most, but there are no well-established, practical methods for providing evidence-based answers to such questions. Led by the National Commission on Prevention Priorities, the authors update the methods for determining the relative health impact and economic value of clinical preventive services. Using new studies, new preventive service recommendations, and improved methods, the authors present a new ranking of clinical preventive services in the companion article. The original ranking and methods were published in this journal in 2001. The current methods report focuses on evidence collection for a priority setting exercise, guidance for which is effectively lacking in the literature. The authors describe their own standards for searching, tracking, and abstracting literature for priority setting. The authors also summarize their methods for making valid comparisons across different services. This report should be useful to those who want to understand additional detail about how the ranking was developed or who want to adapt the methods for their own purposes.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗

PubMed2006

Priorities among effective clinical preventive services: results of a systematic review and analysis.

BACKGROUND: Decision makers at multiple levels need information about which clinical preventive services matter the most so that they can prioritize their actions. This study was designed to produce comparable estimates of relative health impact and cost effectiveness for services considered effective by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. METHODS: The National Commission on Prevention Priorities (NCPP) guided this update to a 2001 ranking of clinical preventive services. The NCPP used new preventive service recommendations up to December 2004, improved methods, and more complete and recent data and evidence. Each service received 1 to 5 points on each of two measures--clinically preventable burden and cost effectiveness--for a total score ranging from 2 to 10. Priorities for improving delivery rates were established by comparing the ranking with what is known of current delivery rates nationally. RESULTS: The three highest-ranking services each with a total score of 10 are discussing aspirin use with high-risk adults, immunizing children, and tobacco-use screening and brief intervention. High-ranking services (scores of 6 and above) with data indicating low current utilization rates (around 50% or lower) include: tobacco-use screening and brief intervention, screening adults aged 50 and older for colorectal cancer, immunizing adults aged 65 and older against pneumococcal disease, and screening young women for Chlamydia. CONCLUSION: This study identifies the most valuable clinical preventive services that can be offered in medical practice and should help decision-makers select which services to emphasize.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Repeated tobacco-use screening and intervention in clinical practice: health impact and cost effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: This report updates 2001 estimates of disease burden prevented and cost effectiveness of tobacco-use screening and brief intervention relative to that of other clinical preventive services. It also addresses repeated counseling because the literature has focused on single episodes of treatment, while in reality that is neither desirable nor likely. METHODS: Literature searches led to four models for calculating the clinically preventable burden of deaths and morbidity from smoking as well as the cost effectiveness of providing the service annually over time. The same methods were used in similar calculations for other preventive services to facilitate comparison. RESULTS: Using methods consistent with existing literature for this service, an estimated 190,000 undiscounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) are saved at a cost of $1100 per QALY saved (discounted). These estimates exclude financial savings from smoking-attributable disease prevented and use the average 12-month quit rate in clinical practice for tobacco screening and brief cessation counseling with cessation medications (5.0%) and without (2.4%). Including the savings of prevented smoking-attributable disease and using the effectiveness of repeated interventions over the lifetime of smokers (23.1%), 2.47 million QALYs are saved at a cost savings of $500 per smoker who receives the service. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis makes repeated clinical tobacco-cessation counseling one of the three most important and cost-effective preventive services that can be provided in medical practice. Greater efforts are needed to achieve more of this potential value by increasing current low levels of performance.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗