A choice experiment to identify the most important elements of a successful cancer screening program according to those who research and manage such programs.

PURPOSE: The relationship between cancer screening activities in Europe and the health systems in which they are embedded varies, with some screening programs organized largely separately and others using existing health service staff and facilities. Whatever the precise arrangements, the opportunity for screening to achieve health gain depends on many elements interacting within and beyond the health system, from an accurate register identifying the target population to a means to ensure and monitor follow-up. METHOD: A conjoint analysis was undertaken with 66 cancer screening experts from 31 countries taking part in EU-TOPIA (towards improved screening for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer in all of Europe) to identify priorities for an effective screening program, taking a whole system perspective. Ten attributes, each with two levels, were derived from a review of the literature and consultation with experts in cancer screening. Statistical software generated 12 profiles that were ranked by respondents and analyzed using standard conjoint analysis. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION: The most important attributes were having up-to-date and evidence-based guidelines, followed by mechanisms for systematic monitoring of screening uptake, having a population register covering all of the eligible population and monitoring long-term outcomes. In discussions about the results, participants argued that quality assurance and adherence to guidelines were important, even though they generated low scores in the experiment. This difference may be due some attributes being interrelated, more wide-ranging or the sequential nature of establishing an effective screening program, with guidelines being the first stage of the process.

A health systems approach to identifying barriers to breast cancer screening programmes. Methodology and application in six European countries.

The benefits of population-based screening for breast cancer are now accepted although, in practice, programmes often fail to achieve their full potential. In this paper, we propose a conceptual model that situates screening programmes within the broader health system to understand the factors that influence their outcomes. We view the overall screening system as having multiple sub-systems to identify the population at risk, generate knowledge of effectiveness, maximise uptake, operate the programme, and optimise follow-up and assurance of subsequent treatment. Based on this model we have developed the Barriers to Effective Screening Tool (BEST) for analysing government-led, population-based screening programmes from a health systems perspective. Conceived as a self-assessment tool, we piloted the tool with key informants in six European countries (Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Italy, The Netherlands and Slovenia) to identify barriers to the optimal operation of population-based breast cancer screening programmes. The pilot provided valuable feedback on the barriers affecting breast cancer screening programmes and stimulated a greater recognition among those operating them of the need to take a health systems perspective. In addition, the pilot led to further development of the tool and provided a foundation for further research into how to overcome the identified barriers.

Identifying the barriers to effective breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening in thirty one European countries using the Barriers to Effective Screening Tool (BEST).

The aim of this study was to identify barriers to effective breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening programmes throughout the whole of the European region using the Barriers to Effective Screening Tool (BEST). The study was part of the scope of the EU-TOPIA (TOwards imProved screening for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer In All of Europe) project and respondents were European screening organisers, researchers and policymakers taking part in a workshop for the project in Budapest in September 2017. 67 respondents from 31 countries responded to the online survey. The study found that there are many barriers to effective screening throughout the system from identification of the eligible population to ensuring appropriate follow-up and treatment for the three cancers. The most common barriers were opportunistic screening, sub-optimal participation, limited capacity (including trained human resource), inadequate and/or disjointed information technology systems and complex administration procedures. Many of the barriers were reported consistently across different countries. This study identified the barriers that, in general, require further investment of resources.

Results of a health systems approach to identify barriers to population-based cervical and colorectal cancer screening programmes in six European countries.

The aim of this study was to identify barriers to effective cervical and colorectal cancers screening programmes in Europe. The Barriers to Effective Screening Tool (BEST), based on a health systems approach, was completed by teams of three to six experts on cancer screening in each of the six countries involved in leading the EU-TOPIA project (TOwards imProved screening for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer In All of Europe). While the basic components of screening systems and the challenges they face, such as low participation, are similar, there are also many differences, both in the structures underpinning particular functions, such as maintenance of populationregisters and monitoring outcomes, and the ways that they operate. Many of these lie outside the strict organisational boundaries of screening programmes. BEST offers a means to identify and prioritise issues for further detailed exploration. The holistic health systems approach to assessing barriers differs from previous approaches. Those focus on individual characteristics that determine participation. The approach described here provides additional opportunities to improve outcomes with measures that are largely within the control of those managing the health system.

The Health Economic Value of Changes in Glycaemic Control, Weight and Rates of Hypoglycaemia in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.

AIMS: Therapy-related consequences of treatment for type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), such as weight gain and hypoglycaemia, act as a barrier to attaining optimal glycaemic control, indirectly influencing the incidence of vascular complications and associated morbidity and mortality. This study quantifies the individual and combined contribution of changes in hypoglycaemia frequency, weight and HbA1c to predicted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) within a T1DM population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We describe the Cardiff Type 1 Diabetes (CT1DM) Model, originally informed by the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) and updated with the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study and Swedish National Diabetes Registry for microvascular and cardiovascular complications respectively. We report model validation results and the QALY impact of HbA1c, weight and hypoglycaemia changes. RESULTS: Validation results demonstrated coefficients of determination for clinical endpoints of R2 = 0.863 (internal R2 = 0.999; external R2 = 0.823), costs R2 = 0.980 and QALYs R2 = 0.951. Achieving and maintaining a 1% HbA1c reduction was estimated to provide 0.61 additional discounted QALYs. Weight changes of ±1kg, ±2kg or ±3kg led to discounted QALY changes of ±0.03, ±0.07 and ±0.10 respectively, while modifying hypoglycaemia frequency by -10%, -20% or -30% resulted in changes of -0.05, -0.11 and -0.17. The differences in discounted costs, life-years and QALYs associated with HbA1c 6% versus 10% were -£19,037, 2.49 and 2.35 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Using a model updated with contemporary epidemiological data, this study presents an outcome-focused perspective to assessing the health economic consequences of differing levels of glycaemic control in T1DM with and without weight and hypoglycaemia effects.

A systematic review of the evidence of the burden of bipolar disorder in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder is recognized as a major mental health issue, and its economic impact has been examined in the United States. However, there exists a general scarcity of published studies and lack of standardized data on the burden of the illness across European countries. In this systematic literature review, we highlight the epidemiological, clinical, and economic outcomes of bipolar disorder in Europe. METHODS: A systematic review of publications from the last 10 years relating to the burden of bipolar disorder was conducted, including studies on epidemiology, patient-related issues, and costs. RESULTS: Data from the UK, Germany, and Italy indicated a prevalence of bipolar disorder of ~1%, and a misdiagnosis rate of 70% from Spain. In one study, up to 75% of patients had at least one DSM-IV comorbidity, commonly anxiety disorders and substance/alcohol abuse. Attempted suicide rates varied between 21%-54%. In the UK, the estimated rate of premature mortality of patients with bipolar I disorder was 18%. The chronicity of bipolar disorder exerted a profound and debilitating effect on the patient. In Germany, 70% of patients were underemployed, and 72% received disability payments. In Italy, 63%-67% of patients were unemployed. In the UK, the annual costs of unemployment and suicide were pound1510 million and pound179 million, respectively, at 1999/2000 prices. The estimated UK national cost of bipolar disorder was pound4.59 billion, with hospitalization during acute episodes representing the largest component. CONCLUSION: Bipolar disorder is a major and underestimated health problem in Europe. A number of issues impact on the economic burden of the disease, such as comorbidities, suicide, early death, unemployment or underemployment. Direct costs of bipolar disorder are mainly associated with hospitalization during acute episodes. Indirect costs are a major contributor to the overall economic burden but are not always recognized in research studies.