Cargando…

Impact of Delaying Effective and Cost-Effective Policy Decisions: An Example From Cervical Cancer Prevention in Norway

Introduction. Delayed implementation of evidence-driven interventions has consequences that can be formally evaluated. In Norway, programs to prevent cervical cancer (CC)—screening and treatment of precancerous lesions and prophylactic vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) infection—have be...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Portnoy, Allison, Nygård, Mari, Trogstad, Lill, Kim, Jane J., Burger, Emily A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8744166/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35024449
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23814683211071093
_version_ 1784630060678905856
author Portnoy, Allison
Nygård, Mari
Trogstad, Lill
Kim, Jane J.
Burger, Emily A.
author_facet Portnoy, Allison
Nygård, Mari
Trogstad, Lill
Kim, Jane J.
Burger, Emily A.
author_sort Portnoy, Allison
collection PubMed
description Introduction. Delayed implementation of evidence-driven interventions has consequences that can be formally evaluated. In Norway, programs to prevent cervical cancer (CC)—screening and treatment of precancerous lesions and prophylactic vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) infection—have been implemented, but each encountered delays in policy implementation. To examine the effect of these delays, we project the outcomes that would have been achieved with timely implementation of two policy changes compared with the de facto delays in implementation (in Norway). Methods. We used a multimodeling approach that combined HPV transmission and cervical carcinogenesis to estimate the health outcomes and timeline for CC elimination associated with the implementation of two CC prevention policy decisions: a multicohort vaccination program of women up to age 26 years with bivalent vaccine in 2009 compared with actual “delayed” implementation in 2016, and a switch from cytology to primary HPV-based testing in 2015 compared with “delayed” rollout in 2020. Results. Timely implementation of two policy changes compared with current Norwegian prevention policy timeline could have averted approximately 970 additional cases (range of top 10 sets: 830–1060) and accelerated the CC elimination timeline by around 4 years (from 2039 to 2035). Conclusions. If delaying implementation of effective and cost-effective interventions is being considered, the decision-making process should include quantitative analyses on the effects of delays.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8744166
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87441662022-01-11 Impact of Delaying Effective and Cost-Effective Policy Decisions: An Example From Cervical Cancer Prevention in Norway Portnoy, Allison Nygård, Mari Trogstad, Lill Kim, Jane J. Burger, Emily A. MDM Policy Pract Brief Report Introduction. Delayed implementation of evidence-driven interventions has consequences that can be formally evaluated. In Norway, programs to prevent cervical cancer (CC)—screening and treatment of precancerous lesions and prophylactic vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) infection—have been implemented, but each encountered delays in policy implementation. To examine the effect of these delays, we project the outcomes that would have been achieved with timely implementation of two policy changes compared with the de facto delays in implementation (in Norway). Methods. We used a multimodeling approach that combined HPV transmission and cervical carcinogenesis to estimate the health outcomes and timeline for CC elimination associated with the implementation of two CC prevention policy decisions: a multicohort vaccination program of women up to age 26 years with bivalent vaccine in 2009 compared with actual “delayed” implementation in 2016, and a switch from cytology to primary HPV-based testing in 2015 compared with “delayed” rollout in 2020. Results. Timely implementation of two policy changes compared with current Norwegian prevention policy timeline could have averted approximately 970 additional cases (range of top 10 sets: 830–1060) and accelerated the CC elimination timeline by around 4 years (from 2039 to 2035). Conclusions. If delaying implementation of effective and cost-effective interventions is being considered, the decision-making process should include quantitative analyses on the effects of delays. SAGE Publications 2022-01-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8744166/ /pubmed/35024449 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23814683211071093 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Brief Report
Portnoy, Allison
Nygård, Mari
Trogstad, Lill
Kim, Jane J.
Burger, Emily A.
Impact of Delaying Effective and Cost-Effective Policy Decisions: An Example From Cervical Cancer Prevention in Norway
title Impact of Delaying Effective and Cost-Effective Policy Decisions: An Example From Cervical Cancer Prevention in Norway
title_full Impact of Delaying Effective and Cost-Effective Policy Decisions: An Example From Cervical Cancer Prevention in Norway
title_fullStr Impact of Delaying Effective and Cost-Effective Policy Decisions: An Example From Cervical Cancer Prevention in Norway
title_full_unstemmed Impact of Delaying Effective and Cost-Effective Policy Decisions: An Example From Cervical Cancer Prevention in Norway
title_short Impact of Delaying Effective and Cost-Effective Policy Decisions: An Example From Cervical Cancer Prevention in Norway
title_sort impact of delaying effective and cost-effective policy decisions: an example from cervical cancer prevention in norway
topic Brief Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8744166/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35024449
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23814683211071093
work_keys_str_mv AT portnoyallison impactofdelayingeffectiveandcosteffectivepolicydecisionsanexamplefromcervicalcancerpreventioninnorway
AT nygardmari impactofdelayingeffectiveandcosteffectivepolicydecisionsanexamplefromcervicalcancerpreventioninnorway
AT trogstadlill impactofdelayingeffectiveandcosteffectivepolicydecisionsanexamplefromcervicalcancerpreventioninnorway
AT kimjanej impactofdelayingeffectiveandcosteffectivepolicydecisionsanexamplefromcervicalcancerpreventioninnorway
AT burgeremilya impactofdelayingeffectiveandcosteffectivepolicydecisionsanexamplefromcervicalcancerpreventioninnorway