Healthcare and patient costs of a proactive chlamydia screening programme: the Chlamydia Screening Studies project

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Most economic evaluations of chlamydia screening do not include costs incurred by patients. The objective of this study was to estimate both the health service and private costs of patients who participated in proactive chlamydia screening, using mailed home-collected specimens as part of the Chlamydia Screening Studies project. METHODS: Data were collected on the administrative costs of the screening study, laboratory time and motion studies and patient-cost questionnaire surveys were conducted. The cost for each screening invitation and for each accepted offer was estimated. One-way sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the effects of variations in patient costs and the number of patients accepting the screening offer. RESULTS: The time and costs of processing urine specimens and vulvo-vaginal swabs from women using two nucleic acid amplification tests were similar. The total cost per screening invitation was 20.37 pounds (95% CI 18.94 pounds to 24.83). This included the National Health Service cost per individual screening invitation 13.55 pounds (95% CI 13.15 pounds to 14.33) and average patient costs of 6.82 pounds (95% CI 5.48 pounds to 10.22). Administrative costs accounted for 50% of the overall cost. CONCLUSIONS: The cost of proactive chlamydia screening is comparable to those of opportunistic screening. Results from this study, which is the first to collect private patient costs associated with a chlamydia screening programme, could be used to inform future policy recommendations and provide unique primary cost data for economic evaluations.

Rapid screening for carriage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus by PCR and associated costs

PCR tests for the rapid and valid detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are now available. We evaluated the costs associated with contact screening for MRSA carriage in a tertiary-care hospital with low MRSA endemicity. Between 1 October 2005 and 28 February 2006, 232 patients were screened during 258 screening episodes (644 samples) for MRSA carriage by GenoType MRSA Direct (Hain Lifescience GmbH, Nehren, Germany). Conventional culture confirmed all PCR results. According to in-house algorithms, 34 of 258 screening episodes (14.7%) would have qualified for preemptive contact isolation, but such isolation was not done upon negative PCR results. MRSA carriage was detected in 4 (1.5%) of 258 screening episodes (i.e., in four patients), of which none qualified for preemptive contact isolation. The use of PCR for all 258 screening episodes added costs (in Swiss francs [CHF]) of CHF 104,328.00 and saved CHF 38,528.00 (for preemptive isolation). The restriction of PCR screening to the 34 episodes that qualified for preemptive contact isolation and screening all others by culture would have lowered costs for PCR to only CHF 11,988.00, a savings of CHF 38,528.00. Therefore, PCR tests are valuable for the rapid detection of MRSA carriers, but high costs require the careful evaluation of their use. In patient populations with low MRSA endemicity, the broad use of PCR probably is not cost-effective.