ABSTRACT
Background/Aims@#This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening compared to no screening in the Korean population from societal and healthcare system perspectives. @*Methods@#A published decision-tree plus Markov model was used to compare the expected costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) between one-time universal HCV screening and no screening in the population aged 40–65 years using the National Health Examination (NHE) program. Input parameters were obtained from analyses of the National Health Insurance claims data, Korean HCV cohort data, or from the literature review. The population aged 40–65 years was simulated in a model spanning a lifetime from both the healthcare system and societal perspectives, which included the cost of productivity loss due to HCV-related deaths. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between universal screening and no screening was estimated. @*Results@#The HCV screening strategy had an ICER of $2,666/QALY and $431/QALY from the healthcare system and societal perspectives, respectively. Both ICERs were far less than the willingness-to-pay threshold of $25,000/QALY, showing that universal screening was highly cost-effective compared to no screening. In various sensitivity analyses, the most influential parameters on cost-effectiveness were the antibodies to HCV (anti-HCV) prevalence, screening costs, and treatment acceptance; however, all ICERs were consistently less than the threshold. If the anti-HCV prevalence was over 0.18%, screening could be cost-effective. @*Conclusions@#One-time universal HCV screening in the Korean population aged 40–65 years using NHE program would be highly cost-effective from both healthcare system and societal perspectives.