Sexually transmitted infections screening at HIV treatment centers for MSM can be cost-effective

Henrike J Vriend; Anna K Lugnér; Maria Xiridou; Maarten F Schim van der Loeff; Maria Prins; Henry J C de Vries; Suzanne E Geerlings; Jan M Prins; Bart J A Rijnders; Maaike G van Veen; Johannes S A Fennema; Maarten J Postma; Marianne van der Sande

doi:10.1097/QAD.0b013e32836281ee

Sexually transmitted infections screening at HIV treatment centers for MSM can be cost-effective

Henrike J Vriend, Anna K Lugnér, Maria Xiridou, Maarten F Schim van der Loeff, Maria Prins, Henry J C de Vries, Suzanne E Geerlings, Jan M Prins, Bart J A Rijnders, Maaike G van Veen, Johannes S A Fennema, Maarten J Postma, Marianne van der Sande

Department of Public Health

Research output: Contribution to journal › A1: Web of Science-article › peer-review

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of anorectal chlamydia screening among men who have sex with men (MSM) in care at HIV treatment centers.

DESIGN: Transmission model combined with economic analysis over a 20-year period.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: MSM in care at HIV treatment centers.

INTERVENTION: Once-yearly or twice-yearly screening for anorectal chlamydia among MSM in care at HIV treatment centers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Averted HIV and chlamydia infections; discounted quality-adjusted life-years and costs; incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

RESULTS: Costs will be saved by routine chlamydia screening of MSM in care at HIV treatment centers if these patients seek little or no screening elsewhere. Nonroutine screening is considerably more expensive than routine screening offered within a scheduled visit. Adding once-yearly chlamydia screening for MSM in care at HIV treatment centers is cost saving when 30% or fewer of those men seek once-yearly screening elsewhere (1.5 to 8.1 million euro saved). Twice-yearly routine screening at HIV treatment centers is cost-effective only when routine screening takes place without additional nonroutine screening (1.9 million euro saved).

CONCLUSIONS: Adding annual chlamydia screening to the HIV consultation will be cost saving as long as only a limited proportion of men are nonroutinely screened. The ICER was most sensitive to the percentage of MSM that continue to be screened elsewhere.

Original language	English
Journal	AIDS
Volume	27
Issue number	14
Pages (from-to)	2281-2290
Number of pages	10
ISSN	0269-9370
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0b013e32836281ee
Publication status	Published - 2013

Keywords

Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Ambulatory Care Facilities
Chlamydia Infections/diagnosis
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Female
Homosexuality, Male
Humans
Male
Mass Screening/economics
Middle Aged
Sexually Transmitted Diseases/diagnosis
Young Adult

Access to Document

10.1097/QAD.0b013e32836281ee

Cite this

Vriend, H. J., Lugnér, A. K., Xiridou, M., Schim van der Loeff, M. F., Prins, M., de Vries, H. J. C., Geerlings, S. E., Prins, J. M., Rijnders, B. J. A., van Veen, M. G., Fennema, J. S. A., Postma, M. J., & van der Sande, M. (2013). Sexually transmitted infections screening at HIV treatment centers for MSM can be cost-effective. AIDS, 27(14), 2281-2290. https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0b013e32836281ee

@article{b7932274454d4810955d3a1d86ab0528,

title = "Sexually transmitted infections screening at HIV treatment centers for MSM can be cost-effective",

abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of anorectal chlamydia screening among men who have sex with men (MSM) in care at HIV treatment centers.DESIGN: Transmission model combined with economic analysis over a 20-year period.SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: MSM in care at HIV treatment centers.INTERVENTION: Once-yearly or twice-yearly screening for anorectal chlamydia among MSM in care at HIV treatment centers.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Averted HIV and chlamydia infections; discounted quality-adjusted life-years and costs; incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).RESULTS: Costs will be saved by routine chlamydia screening of MSM in care at HIV treatment centers if these patients seek little or no screening elsewhere. Nonroutine screening is considerably more expensive than routine screening offered within a scheduled visit. Adding once-yearly chlamydia screening for MSM in care at HIV treatment centers is cost saving when 30% or fewer of those men seek once-yearly screening elsewhere (1.5 to 8.1 million euro saved). Twice-yearly routine screening at HIV treatment centers is cost-effective only when routine screening takes place without additional nonroutine screening (1.9 million euro saved).CONCLUSIONS: Adding annual chlamydia screening to the HIV consultation will be cost saving as long as only a limited proportion of men are nonroutinely screened. The ICER was most sensitive to the percentage of MSM that continue to be screened elsewhere.",

keywords = "Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Ambulatory Care Facilities, Chlamydia Infections/diagnosis, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Female, Homosexuality, Male, Humans, Male, Mass Screening/economics, Middle Aged, Sexually Transmitted Diseases/diagnosis, Young Adult",

author = "Vriend, {Henrike J} and Lugn{\'e}r, {Anna K} and Maria Xiridou and {Schim van der Loeff}, {Maarten F} and Maria Prins and {de Vries}, {Henry J C} and Geerlings, {Suzanne E} and Prins, {Jan M} and Rijnders, {Bart J A} and {van Veen}, {Maaike G} and Fennema, {Johannes S A} and Postma, {Maarten J} and {van der Sande}, Marianne",

note = "NPP",

year = "2013",

doi = "10.1097/QAD.0b013e32836281ee",

language = "English",

volume = "27",

pages = "2281--2290",

journal = "AIDS",

issn = "0269-9370",

publisher = "Lippincott Williams & Wilkins",

number = "14",

}

Vriend, HJ, Lugnér, AK, Xiridou, M, Schim van der Loeff, MF, Prins, M, de Vries, HJC, Geerlings, SE, Prins, JM, Rijnders, BJA, van Veen, MG, Fennema, JSA, Postma, MJ & van der Sande, M 2013, 'Sexually transmitted infections screening at HIV treatment centers for MSM can be cost-effective', AIDS, vol. 27, no. 14, pp. 2281-2290. https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0b013e32836281ee

TY - JOUR

T1 - Sexually transmitted infections screening at HIV treatment centers for MSM can be cost-effective

AU - Vriend, Henrike J

AU - Lugnér, Anna K

AU - Xiridou, Maria

AU - Schim van der Loeff, Maarten F

AU - Prins, Maria

AU - de Vries, Henry J C

AU - Geerlings, Suzanne E

AU - Prins, Jan M

AU - Rijnders, Bart J A

AU - van Veen, Maaike G

AU - Fennema, Johannes S A

AU - Postma, Maarten J

AU - van der Sande, Marianne

N1 - NPP

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of anorectal chlamydia screening among men who have sex with men (MSM) in care at HIV treatment centers.DESIGN: Transmission model combined with economic analysis over a 20-year period.SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: MSM in care at HIV treatment centers.INTERVENTION: Once-yearly or twice-yearly screening for anorectal chlamydia among MSM in care at HIV treatment centers.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Averted HIV and chlamydia infections; discounted quality-adjusted life-years and costs; incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).RESULTS: Costs will be saved by routine chlamydia screening of MSM in care at HIV treatment centers if these patients seek little or no screening elsewhere. Nonroutine screening is considerably more expensive than routine screening offered within a scheduled visit. Adding once-yearly chlamydia screening for MSM in care at HIV treatment centers is cost saving when 30% or fewer of those men seek once-yearly screening elsewhere (1.5 to 8.1 million euro saved). Twice-yearly routine screening at HIV treatment centers is cost-effective only when routine screening takes place without additional nonroutine screening (1.9 million euro saved).CONCLUSIONS: Adding annual chlamydia screening to the HIV consultation will be cost saving as long as only a limited proportion of men are nonroutinely screened. The ICER was most sensitive to the percentage of MSM that continue to be screened elsewhere.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of anorectal chlamydia screening among men who have sex with men (MSM) in care at HIV treatment centers.DESIGN: Transmission model combined with economic analysis over a 20-year period.SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: MSM in care at HIV treatment centers.INTERVENTION: Once-yearly or twice-yearly screening for anorectal chlamydia among MSM in care at HIV treatment centers.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Averted HIV and chlamydia infections; discounted quality-adjusted life-years and costs; incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).RESULTS: Costs will be saved by routine chlamydia screening of MSM in care at HIV treatment centers if these patients seek little or no screening elsewhere. Nonroutine screening is considerably more expensive than routine screening offered within a scheduled visit. Adding once-yearly chlamydia screening for MSM in care at HIV treatment centers is cost saving when 30% or fewer of those men seek once-yearly screening elsewhere (1.5 to 8.1 million euro saved). Twice-yearly routine screening at HIV treatment centers is cost-effective only when routine screening takes place without additional nonroutine screening (1.9 million euro saved).CONCLUSIONS: Adding annual chlamydia screening to the HIV consultation will be cost saving as long as only a limited proportion of men are nonroutinely screened. The ICER was most sensitive to the percentage of MSM that continue to be screened elsewhere.

KW - Adolescent

KW - Adult

KW - Aged

KW - Ambulatory Care Facilities

KW - Chlamydia Infections/diagnosis

KW - Cost-Benefit Analysis

KW - Female

KW - Homosexuality, Male

KW - Humans

KW - Male

KW - Mass Screening/economics

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Sexually Transmitted Diseases/diagnosis

KW - Young Adult

U2 - 10.1097/QAD.0b013e32836281ee

DO - 10.1097/QAD.0b013e32836281ee

M3 - A1: Web of Science-article

C2 - 24067620

SN - 0269-9370

VL - 27

SP - 2281

EP - 2290

JO - AIDS

JF - AIDS

IS - 14

ER -

Sexually transmitted infections screening at HIV treatment centers for MSM can be cost-effective

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this