Quality of life valuations of mammography screening

被引:28
作者
Bonomi, Amy E. [1 ,2 ]
Boudreau, Denise M. [2 ]
Fishman, Paul A. [2 ]
Ludman, Evette [2 ]
Mohelnitzky, Amy [2 ]
Cannon, Elizabeth A. [1 ]
Seger, Deb [2 ]
机构
[1] Ohio State Univ, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[2] Grp Hlth Cooperat Puget Sound, Ctr Hlth Studies, Seattle, WA 98101 USA
关键词
breast cancer screening; cost-effectiveness; mammography; quality of life; valuations;
D O I
10.1007/s11136-008-9353-2
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective To obtain quality-of-life (QOL) valuations associated with mammography screening and breast cancer treatment that are suitable for use in cost-effectiveness analyses. Methods Subjects comprised 131 women (age range 50-79 years) randomly sampled from a breast cancer screening program. In an in-person or telephone interview, women rated the QOL impact of 14 clinical scenarios (ranging from mammography to end-of-life care for breast cancer) using a visual analogue scale anchored by death (0) and perfect health/quality of life (100). Results Women rated the scenarios describing true negative results, false positive results, and routine screening mammography at 80 or above on a scale of 0-100, suggesting that they perceive these states as being close to perfect health. They rated adjuvant chemotherapy (39.7; range 10-90), palliation/end-of-life care (35.8; range 0-100), and recurrence at 1 year (33.0; range 0-95) the lowest, suggesting that these health states are perceived as compromised. Women rated receiving news of a breast cancer diagnosis (true positive) (45.7; range 5-100) and receiving delayed news of a breast cancer diagnosis (false negative) (48.5; range 5-100) as being comparable to undergoing mastectomy (48.3; range 10-100) and radiation therapy (46.2; range 5-100) for breast cancer. Conclusions These data can be used to update cost analyses of mammography screening that wish to take into account the QOL impact of screening.
引用
收藏
页码:801 / 814
页数:14
相关论文
共 48 条
[1]  
*AM COLL PREV MED, SCREEN MAMM BREAST C
[2]  
Bennett KJ, 1996, QUALITY LIFE PHARMAC, P253
[3]   Reported drop in mammography - Is this cause for concern? [J].
Breen, Nancy ;
Cronin, Kathleen A. ;
Meissner, Helen I. ;
Taplin, Stephen H. ;
Tangka, Florence K. ;
Tiro, Jasmin A. ;
McNeel, Timothy S. .
CANCER, 2007, 109 (12) :2405-2409
[4]   The psychological impact of mammographic screening. A systematic review [J].
Brett, J ;
Bankhead, C ;
Henderson, B ;
Watson, E ;
Austoker, J .
PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY, 2005, 14 (11) :917-938
[5]  
Chie WC, 2000, J FORMOS MED ASSOC, V99, P677
[6]   Predicting the cumulative risk of false-positive mammograms [J].
Christiansen, CL ;
Wang, F ;
Barton, MB ;
Kreuter, W ;
Elmore, JG ;
Gelfand, AE ;
Fletcher, SW .
JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2000, 92 (20) :1657-1666
[7]   Short-term impact of cancer prevention and screening activities on quality of life\ [J].
Cullen, J ;
Schwartz, MD ;
Lawrence, WF ;
Selby, JV ;
Mandelblatt, JS .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2004, 22 (05) :943-952
[8]   Quality of life of early-stage breast cancer patients treated with radical mastectomy or breast-conserving procedures: Results of EORTC trial 10801 [J].
Curran, D ;
van Dongen, JP ;
Aaronson, NK ;
Kiebert, G ;
Fentiman, IS ;
Mignolet, F ;
Bartelink, H .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1998, 34 (03) :307-314
[9]   THE IMPACT OF A BREAST-CANCER SCREENING-PROGRAM ON QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE-YEARS [J].
DEHAES, JCJM ;
DEKONING, HJ ;
VANOORTMARSSEN, GJ ;
VANAGT, HME ;
DEBRUYN, AE ;
van der Maas, PJ .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1991, 49 (04) :538-544
[10]   BREAST-CANCER SCREENING AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS - POLICY ALTERNATIVES, QUALITY-OF-LIFE CONSIDERATIONS AND THE POSSIBLE IMPACT OF UNCERTAIN FACTORS [J].
DEKONING, HJ ;
VANINEVELD, BM ;
VANOORTMARSSEN, GJ ;
DEHAES, JCJM ;
COLLETTE, HJA ;
HENDRIKS, JHCL ;
VANDERMAAS, P .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1991, 49 (04) :531-537