Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/11732
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCoyle, D-
dc.contributor.authorGrunfeld, E-
dc.contributor.authorCoyle, K-
dc.contributor.authorPond, G-
dc.contributor.authorJulian, JA-
dc.contributor.authorLevine, MN-
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-09T12:48:01Z-
dc.date.available2014-01-01-
dc.date.available2015-12-09T12:48:01Z-
dc.date.issued2014-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Oncology Practice, 10(2): pp. e86 - e92, (2014)en_US
dc.identifier.issn1554-7477-
dc.identifier.issn1935-469X-
dc.identifier.urihttp://jop.ascopubs.org/content/10/2/e86-
dc.identifier.urihttp://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/11732-
dc.descriptionThis article is available to view on PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24326740en_US
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Survivorship care plans (SCPs) are recommended for patients who have completed primary treatment and are transitioning to routine follow-up care. However, SCPs may be costly, and their effectiveness is unproven. The study objective was to assess the cost effectiveness of an SCP for breast cancer survivors transitioning to routine follow-up care with their own primary care physician (PCP) using data from a recent randomized controlled trial (RCT). Methods: Resource use and utility data for 408 patients with breast cancer enrolled in the RCT comparing an SCP with standard care (no SCP) were used. The intervention group received a 30-minute educational session with a nurse and their SCP, and their PCPs received the SCP plus a full guideline on follow-up. Analysis assessed the societal costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for the intervention group and the control group over the 2-year follow-up of the RCT. Uncertainty concerning cost effectiveness was assessed through nonparametric bootstrapping and deterministic sensitivity analysis. Results: The no-SCP group had better outcomes than the SCP group: total costs per patient were lower for standard care (Canadian $698 v $765), and total QALYs were almost equivalent (1.42 for standard care v 1.41 for the SCP). The probability that the SCP was cost effective was 0.26 at a threshold value of a QALY of $50,000. A variety of sensitivity analyses did not change the conclusions of the analysis. Conclusion: This SCP would be costly to introduce and would not be a cost effective use of scarce health care resources.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipSupported by Grant No. 17423 from the Canadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance. E.G. support by a clinician scientist award from the Ontario Institute for Cancer Res (OICR) through funding provided by the Government of Ontario.en_US
dc.format.extente86 - e92-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherThe American Society of Clinical Oncologyen_US
dc.subjectSurvivorship care plansen_US
dc.subjectBreast cancer survivorsen_US
dc.subjectCost effectivenessen_US
dc.subjectAssessmenten_US
dc.subjectPrimary care physicianen_US
dc.titleCost effectiveness of a survivorship care plan for breast cancer survivorsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JOP.2013.001142-
dc.relation.isPartOfJournal of Oncology Practice-
pubs.issue2-
pubs.publication-statusPublished-
pubs.publication-statusPublished-
pubs.volume10-
Appears in Collections:Health Economics Research Group (HERG)

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.