title: Prostate cancer, the PSA test and academic detailing in Australian general practice: an economic evaluation.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate whether introduction of a national education program for GPs to improve decision making relating to the use of prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing for screening represents 'value-for-money' from the perspective of the Australian Government.
  
  
  METHODS
  The annual equivalent costs and consequences of a proposed national program in steady state operation are estimated for Australia using 1996 as the reference year. Because of the controversy about the efficacy of screening using PSA testing, two scenarios are modelled. Uncertainty in the model is examined using Monte Carlo simulation methods.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In scenario one, our model predicts that the national program would cost dollars 12.5 million (gross) or dollars 6.6 million (net), would reduce the burden of disease by 4.7% of total DALYs due to prostate cancer in those aged 70 and over, with no loss of life and an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of dollars 16,000/DALY (gross) and dollars 8,500/DALY (net). In scenario two, the proposed program would cost dollars 12.5 million (gross) or dollars 7.1 million (net), would reduce the burden of disease by 3.1% of total, increase by 44 the prostate cancer deaths at an ICER of dollars 24,000/DALY (gross) and dollars 14,000/DALY (net).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  These findings, with an overall health benefit at moderate cost and acceptable ICER, support the case for consideration of a national education program on the assumption that prostate cancer screening over age 70 does not reduce mortality. A larger Australian study currently being conducted should provide stronger evidence on the value of implementing a full national program.
authors.affiliation: Budget, Planning and Review, Financial and Corporate Services, Department of Human Services, Melbourne, Victoria. christine.stone@dhs.vic.gov.au
authors.forename: Christine A
authors.initials: CA
authors.lastname: Stone
authors.forename: Frank W
authors.initials: FW
authors.lastname: May
authors.forename: Carole B
authors.initials: CB
authors.lastname: Pinnock
authors.forename: Mark
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Elwood
authors.forename: Debra S
authors.initials: DS
authors.lastname: Rowett
mesh_terms: D001315:Australia / Q000453:epidemiology; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis / Q000379:methods; D003661:Decision Support Techniques; D005194:Family Practice / Q000191:economics / Q000193:education*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000191:economics*; D008954:Models, Biological; D017059:Models, Econometric; D009010:Monte Carlo Method; D009313:National Health Programs / Q000191:economics*; D017430:Prostate-Specific Antigen; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000191:economics / Q000453:epidemiology*; D019057:Quality-Adjusted Life Years; D014146:Training Support / Q000191:economics*; D035501:Uncertainty
chemical_list: D017430:Prostate-Specific Antigen