Derakhshan, Fatemeh

Simorgh Research Repository

cttfr,(Pu(,,ll-.,)p ,r. L--r Zi.bl s ir-r;l-rr-o o.r-S,ir-j I s.: l-,aj.-! I a-i-i-l rit | ,r-r tj-i; u eh-ir a-a Lj iJ q qa'.il I l++: 11 I 3J-.c1sl eii,'t I ,Jg+ ,s13.)L+i ,siL4nl n*:i JULz-i0 l-rJJ d rJ -9.o a--J Lh-o ::b^+iU L,:,-r1 : Ulc L-g: L-aj-o I 3 .: Lior I,rj g; L+ Ortr .-o 1j-5 -:: 13 l-i-o .t-l.j L,,J Iu"-i- I i:--r ;liS .: , cs ) ) ) 93 L-J 1i5 .:1o-1i ul!4J JL-J;;( 4++ : ,'.-. ::-* -L-rkerman University of Meciical SciencesFaculty of Managcnlent ancl Medical Infortr';i-rotrN'laster's degree in Health IrconomicsTitle:The cost effectiveness of screening for osteoporosis : Case of KermanBy:Fatemeh derakhshanSupervisor:Mohsen BarouniAdvisors:Reza GodarziNozar NakhaeeYear:\ rc f \ r. q .ll r 1-(udt', ,y'*,v .#d:orl'qoJ.fo9 ;)* rl,* ,:,u15 ,i "-.[ d-;-ie ,:.y)t\ aJ c-l ;, 9>;-l 4fL O:V: ,.t.y 3.Li ;I,u,;i .r5o-!lf dl.o "!-i" Jl' ;l .,-C ,i L br" .5lo .rS**<- I cj,,L* .l,l ;YIi t* -u;! u^ ;1y::,1 J*<.-,-'i".J'* jL t;oar-;-",;lr,-1 ,.: )sx#\.rtL*,,'*t .<.si\.)tt.s.)Uaq ji .51-6.!a)1),-.e 3y9;t*,t.c-l .]L Y?\/?\, d\tl. ,yS 1: 'ol,i ,f,-r- ,r,l9,U ! Jr,.6 io,I I /tdJL AA .5YL ;b,* I J\ \5 AJtt ;,-l ir.o ;.'+ 9 ;-l .g;L^:;l .,1!;)r1 4JlL .<,- AJIt- O,.lGf t t OST pl-il Jtl &r, ;-1 azrS pE;l .sl &x t) utro * e fJ\* l-ti ,r.:9, ,,t.5 ;lr;"qi;-.r, c,l'),'l!l t ":,' !.rl V! $1r: ;l9,rl -5 ,-. 3*., al 6rlr!1 L.(lt DXA pE l p9: +L';". a.L;-;,Y.\\d.ii Treeage )pl ey 1l o:ii;,1 \ uf ,V Ju t 5,6,6r-^a'cir: f,-r olJlt -lc)ttl 9 or"i.r; plz.rl a.U; *,,;.ril c,,ro,f!-z; ;,>i ,1.-r- p*"2,tb a;.atJa-|i,,2: 6r. + ),-V * 1YY,-r.l .f^" a, -9c: .),j =i 'r-LJ,r;:5p:^q-t oJ r'j \ " ' ,l 22 ->* ':1) .Jj)o J5U ,t- f '12\ I )ll- .t :1;i lYVg J) (1. ?'l\\ )'" b7\ .1,-1;1Y/Y ,s.,*C-L- -ror':) s-r;,r-r: Y./A) s:l:,"E:l l, .5;r.;l: F YAf ir; 3-Lj-bl) d,.r.-.;l:;q.' *'< Li,.!, q,YY ) 2*-*-5,-" or.; -<rr rt;, i-^.*:;,c;lS- '|:*.g[,r,;; -q^^^z! or:,f t,f.J-; r, '1 Ctn,'rlffrzr 1V,".,or;l,o;-l ,-SX Zyr".:l,-il ;-,-"e., Y! !;*q,.*^: s:ll;L;; rl:.r;* tL;71 .gpi-;;il 9.,y-!- i";i":-:-"I')Y,, .r Y!'DAi-\',sfy" ,S;1;-l zuJ-)b . col or; a;lrl c*)L a.- 015;,-r ;l DXAg OST ;9, 9:ro .5ro c"-p:,*y *. Ji1*l ro.r;:.rl .:rl: gi^+.t--p F-) dl,a,5;lr;il !;+; .r-.l;!.f -lL,r t"AAtYYt.Vfdt"1,*{i OST fl"il Lj-- p* 6y1 ;-,.:rll l, c-,^lL Ly*- ?y" Jf\i-l a't r-i! Li" f.A1 , f.Y\' \'A's# 4GfAi:!;b,.-,)f r.rl,p , ;1,,>';-l J ."..1*; ;>"1* JP o2) ('l.',-1 3)Ui *t, +' aJ :l; ;L; aJ"J- ;-1C Jrr ;l; a5:;-l^; flil DXA a-J'rl" r--ru; .r-i-r.; FL JL aA -<YL :lr-il er *( jl ,;J .uK,-l).5X Sra\f a.V; o:;>-.;l o;-;o JJ-; aa-; )1y J) o.:+4-b.i $) 6,bl,,aJ1t^ r.: (lfl):lil6y. Sra\* fei.-e-ltr +DXA qJtt.1^,t.,)l DXA "lrfaOST ,ys, G-.. pr: '5'slr;-1 ,;19:-l.:) ur":,,! lr;1,o>;,1 ,!,-" s,AL.* )y, ,* )Q;^.v" o-* rljS c-L' t{:Jd! u" y ;i'.;\ a:-rl ,1,;';i.-r-o: ,lf l9 ,;;51 "-a.'.51 aL,*OST,DXA ,;\.f , ;ly;;-\ 6 ,-" 5,3U.*' s-"2,1i1+;-p :lo .ilr.\ltJ;1;(4+-.- J,"-t :r:+ i;Tital:Cost-Effectiyeness Analysis of Osteoporosis Scre,ening in KermanAi--si:';lc1Introduction: Osteoporosis is the most corxmon metabolic bone disease" characterized inparticuiar rvith leduced amount of bone minerals ancl matrix. The high prer,aience of thedisease and associated fractures is among the fhctors that incur -qreat treatmenl costs andcause mortality in corring decades. hrvestigation into the ffinancial] burclen of osteoporrisisirr{ranshcrvedthatthecostperciisability-adjustedlifeyear(DAI-Y)isr-i.\/i1[rials].N'Iethodology; il,is cross-seciional. econometric, cost-cl ctivencss stucly was conductecl int ' t i. The eligible subjects included all people over cc i,ears of age in Kerman County. Thestatistical population included all r'vomen and ruL'll okler than ir years in Kerman. llirir. First.screening was conducted in tu,'o sta-qes. The first stage inciuded the administration of theosteoporosis self-assessment tool and completion of the questionnaire. The seconrl staqe wasthe administration of dual x-ray absorptiometry ql)XA t fol the subjects at high risk. fheMarkov decision-tree urodel was made in TreeAge Y , \ ) . Llsiylo data obtained from this andother studies. Frnally^ the cost-effectiveness analr,sis rvas con<luctecl. In addition. thesensitii.,ity analysis of uncertaili), ptratneters of the model u,as can-it-ti out.Findings: In total. q'Yr out of \,"' persons! invited tbr tace-to-tace intervieu, al horne. didthe intenier.r, (ir.Y%). ciY peopie 1c1.1%) were women and rYolo l,ere illiterate a1d ir0zowere resident in the city. A total of 1rY people rvlto took the -quiclance for densitornetrylr'erforme(i 'i tr subjects with Densitl.(^.Y,o , Y\'.i-\/./\\1-Y\'.\'y CI). In the analysis t,f iogisticrcgression, the variables of llcation. -eencler and knou,n risi, o1'osteopor"osis u,eresignificantl.v correlated rvith DXA acceptance. auci osteopolrsis also increased witlr ;r.gc.'fhe cosls of botl-r OST anct DXA nrethods are preseutecl in terms of health insnrance. fhethird strates)' cost. tvhich is i ',\'il\ i.Y: ftials. costs more than olhel strategies. 1'heeffectiVeness of each strateglr is \.''A, a.rr. i..r1. respectively, uhrch rs tite tltrr-t.l tnostdesirable strategy. The third strategy is to peiform Osl- using DXA at the highest cost ancl it:ialueis \1i.v\ir.1i.Cotrclusion: 'I'his study shorved that less than one thilil of people orel the agLr of el . wcre.'t i1ling to stu!i\ I)XA despite showing homeop:,rlric intcirrr:rtion about the risks ci'''I.trilL)roriisandprovidingirt'r:1,i.i,\,.shorvingalou,participatiorr|-.t.'i\t/o)inthi:stucly.j j4sra . ".-, ^-i, JAs a result. the cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis screening with OST/DXA is greater tlianwith DXA alone or do nothin-s. Therefore, healthcare insurance policymakers arerecommended to cover the costs of osteoporosis screening.Ke1,1vo.6t' CosrEffectirreness, Osteoporosi s Scr eening, Kerman. DXA, OSTAi

تحلیل هزینه اثر بخشی غربالگری پوکی استخوان : مطالعه موردی کرمان

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Simorgh Research Repository