A Cost Analysis of Universal versus Targeted Cholesterol Screening in Pediatrics

Anna Jo Smith, Elizabeth L. Turner, Sanjay Kinra, Joann N Bodurtha, Alyna T. Chien

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: To compare the number of children needed to screen to identify a case of childhood dyslipidemia and estimate costs under universal vs targeted screening approaches. Study design: We constructed a decision-analytic model comparing the health system costs of universal vs targeted screening for hyperlipidemia in US children aged 10 years over a 1-year time horizon. Targeted screening was defined by family history: dyslipidemia in a parent and/or early cardiovascular disease in a first-degree relative. Prevalence of any hyperlipidemia (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] ≥130 mg/dL) and severe hyperlipidemia (LDL ≥190 mg/dL or LDL ≥160 mg/dL with family history) were obtained from published estimates. Costs were estimated from the 2016 Maryland Medicaid fee schedule. We performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate the influence of key variables on the incremental cost per case detected. Results: For universal screening, the number needed to screen to identify 1 case was 12 for any hyperlipidemia and 111 for severe hyperlipidemia. For targeted screening, the number needed to screen was 7 for any hyperlipidemia and 49 for severe hyperlipidemia. The incremental cost per case detected for universal compared with targeted screening was $1980 for any hyperlipidemia and $32 170 for severe hyperlipidemia. Conclusions: Our model suggests that universal cholesterol screening detects hyperlipidemia at a low cost per case, but may not be the most cost-efficient way to identify children with severe hyperlipidemia who are most likely to benefit from treatment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)201-207.e2
JournalJournal of Pediatrics
Volume196
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2018

Fingerprint

Hyperlipidemias
Cholesterol
Pediatrics
Costs and Cost Analysis
LDL Lipoproteins
Dyslipidemias
Fee Schedules
Medicaid
Health Care Costs
Cardiovascular Diseases

Keywords

  • hyperlipidemia
  • primary care
  • screening

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

Cite this

A Cost Analysis of Universal versus Targeted Cholesterol Screening in Pediatrics. / Smith, Anna Jo; Turner, Elizabeth L.; Kinra, Sanjay; Bodurtha, Joann N; Chien, Alyna T.

In: Journal of Pediatrics, Vol. 196, 01.05.2018, p. 201-207.e2.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Smith, Anna Jo ; Turner, Elizabeth L. ; Kinra, Sanjay ; Bodurtha, Joann N ; Chien, Alyna T. / A Cost Analysis of Universal versus Targeted Cholesterol Screening in Pediatrics. In: Journal of Pediatrics. 2018 ; Vol. 196. pp. 201-207.e2.
@article{4a95a18528394d3186e968ad521c95f6,
title = "A Cost Analysis of Universal versus Targeted Cholesterol Screening in Pediatrics",
abstract = "Objective: To compare the number of children needed to screen to identify a case of childhood dyslipidemia and estimate costs under universal vs targeted screening approaches. Study design: We constructed a decision-analytic model comparing the health system costs of universal vs targeted screening for hyperlipidemia in US children aged 10 years over a 1-year time horizon. Targeted screening was defined by family history: dyslipidemia in a parent and/or early cardiovascular disease in a first-degree relative. Prevalence of any hyperlipidemia (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] ≥130 mg/dL) and severe hyperlipidemia (LDL ≥190 mg/dL or LDL ≥160 mg/dL with family history) were obtained from published estimates. Costs were estimated from the 2016 Maryland Medicaid fee schedule. We performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate the influence of key variables on the incremental cost per case detected. Results: For universal screening, the number needed to screen to identify 1 case was 12 for any hyperlipidemia and 111 for severe hyperlipidemia. For targeted screening, the number needed to screen was 7 for any hyperlipidemia and 49 for severe hyperlipidemia. The incremental cost per case detected for universal compared with targeted screening was $1980 for any hyperlipidemia and $32 170 for severe hyperlipidemia. Conclusions: Our model suggests that universal cholesterol screening detects hyperlipidemia at a low cost per case, but may not be the most cost-efficient way to identify children with severe hyperlipidemia who are most likely to benefit from treatment.",
keywords = "hyperlipidemia, primary care, screening",
author = "Smith, {Anna Jo} and Turner, {Elizabeth L.} and Sanjay Kinra and Bodurtha, {Joann N} and Chien, {Alyna T.}",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jpeds.2018.01.027",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "196",
pages = "201--207.e2",
journal = "Journal of Pediatrics",
issn = "0022-3476",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Cost Analysis of Universal versus Targeted Cholesterol Screening in Pediatrics

AU - Smith, Anna Jo

AU - Turner, Elizabeth L.

AU - Kinra, Sanjay

AU - Bodurtha, Joann N

AU - Chien, Alyna T.

PY - 2018/5/1

Y1 - 2018/5/1

N2 - Objective: To compare the number of children needed to screen to identify a case of childhood dyslipidemia and estimate costs under universal vs targeted screening approaches. Study design: We constructed a decision-analytic model comparing the health system costs of universal vs targeted screening for hyperlipidemia in US children aged 10 years over a 1-year time horizon. Targeted screening was defined by family history: dyslipidemia in a parent and/or early cardiovascular disease in a first-degree relative. Prevalence of any hyperlipidemia (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] ≥130 mg/dL) and severe hyperlipidemia (LDL ≥190 mg/dL or LDL ≥160 mg/dL with family history) were obtained from published estimates. Costs were estimated from the 2016 Maryland Medicaid fee schedule. We performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate the influence of key variables on the incremental cost per case detected. Results: For universal screening, the number needed to screen to identify 1 case was 12 for any hyperlipidemia and 111 for severe hyperlipidemia. For targeted screening, the number needed to screen was 7 for any hyperlipidemia and 49 for severe hyperlipidemia. The incremental cost per case detected for universal compared with targeted screening was $1980 for any hyperlipidemia and $32 170 for severe hyperlipidemia. Conclusions: Our model suggests that universal cholesterol screening detects hyperlipidemia at a low cost per case, but may not be the most cost-efficient way to identify children with severe hyperlipidemia who are most likely to benefit from treatment.

AB - Objective: To compare the number of children needed to screen to identify a case of childhood dyslipidemia and estimate costs under universal vs targeted screening approaches. Study design: We constructed a decision-analytic model comparing the health system costs of universal vs targeted screening for hyperlipidemia in US children aged 10 years over a 1-year time horizon. Targeted screening was defined by family history: dyslipidemia in a parent and/or early cardiovascular disease in a first-degree relative. Prevalence of any hyperlipidemia (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] ≥130 mg/dL) and severe hyperlipidemia (LDL ≥190 mg/dL or LDL ≥160 mg/dL with family history) were obtained from published estimates. Costs were estimated from the 2016 Maryland Medicaid fee schedule. We performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate the influence of key variables on the incremental cost per case detected. Results: For universal screening, the number needed to screen to identify 1 case was 12 for any hyperlipidemia and 111 for severe hyperlipidemia. For targeted screening, the number needed to screen was 7 for any hyperlipidemia and 49 for severe hyperlipidemia. The incremental cost per case detected for universal compared with targeted screening was $1980 for any hyperlipidemia and $32 170 for severe hyperlipidemia. Conclusions: Our model suggests that universal cholesterol screening detects hyperlipidemia at a low cost per case, but may not be the most cost-efficient way to identify children with severe hyperlipidemia who are most likely to benefit from treatment.

KW - hyperlipidemia

KW - primary care

KW - screening

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045400959&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85045400959&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpeds.2018.01.027

DO - 10.1016/j.jpeds.2018.01.027

M3 - Article

C2 - 29703359

AN - SCOPUS:85045400959

VL - 196

SP - 201-207.e2

JO - Journal of Pediatrics

JF - Journal of Pediatrics

SN - 0022-3476

ER -