Cost-utility analysis of the screening program for early oral cancer detection in Thailand.

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess the cost-utility of an oral precancer screening program compared to a no-screening program in Thailand.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Markov models were performed to simulate costs and Quality Adjusted Life-Years (QALYs) of both the screening and no-screening programs in the Thai population aged over 40 years. There are four steps to the screening program in Thailand: 1) mouth self-examination (MSE); 2) visual examination by trained dental nurses (VETDN); 3) visual examination by trained dentists (VETD); and 4) visual examination by oral surgeons (VEOS). The societal perspective and lifetime horizon were applied. Variables used were derived from the pilot study of the oral precancer screening program in Roi Et province as well as through patient interviews and local and international literature reviews. Results were presented in terms of Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICER). Sensitivity analysis was performed to assess parameters uncertainty.<h4>Results</h4>The screening program yielded higher costs (1,362 Baht) and QALYs (0.0044 years) than the no screening program, producing an ICER of 311,030 Baht per QALY gained. This indicates that the screening program is cost-ineffective in the Thai context, where the cost-effectiveness threshold is THB 160,000 per QALY gained. However, the programs will be cost-effective if the screening program are improved in one of three ways; 1) the sensitivity and specificity of MSE are more than 60%, 2) the sensitivity and specificity of VETDN are greater than 90%, or 3) the low accuracy steps like MSE or VETDN are removed from the screening program.<h4>Conclusion</h4>The screening program is found to be cost-ineffective for oral precancer detection in Thailand. However, this study suggests 3 alternative policy options to ensure the cost-effectiveness of the program.

Abstract licence: CC BY

29 more references, whose wording the paper’s licence keeps private.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.