Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/59624
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMarinus Van Hulsten_US
dc.contributor.authorGijs A.A. Hubbenen_US
dc.contributor.authorKwamena W.C. Sagoeen_US
dc.contributor.authorCharupon Promwongen_US
dc.contributor.authorParichart Permpikulen_US
dc.contributor.authorLadda Fongsatitkulen_US
dc.contributor.authorDiarmuid M. Glynnen_US
dc.contributor.authorCees T.Smit Sibingaen_US
dc.contributor.authorMaarten J. Postmaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-10T03:18:30Z-
dc.date.available2018-09-10T03:18:30Z-
dc.date.issued2009-12-01en_US
dc.identifier.issn15372995en_US
dc.identifier.issn00411132en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-71849086840en_US
dc.identifier.other10.1111/j.1537-2995.2009.02351.xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=71849086840&origin=inwarden_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/59624-
dc.description.abstractBackground: The goal of our research was to actively involve decision makers in the economic assessment of screening strategies in their region. This study attempted to accomplish this by providing an easy-to-use Web interface at http://www.bloodsafety.info that allows decision makers to adapt this model to local conditions. Study Design and Methods: The cost-effectiveness was compared of 1) adding antigen screening to antibody screening for hepatitis C virus (HCV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV); 2) adding nucleic acid amplification testing (NAT) on hepatitis B virus (HBV), HCV, and HIV in minipool (pool of 6 [MP6] and 24 [MP24]) to antibody screening and hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) screening; and 3) individual-donation NAT on HBV, HCV, and HIV to antibody screening and HBsAg screening for Ghana, Thailand, and the Netherlands. Results: The combination of HCV antibody-antigen combination (combo) and HIV combo added to antibody screening in Ghana and Thailand was cost-effective according to the WHO criteria. MP24-NAT screening in Ghana was also cost-effective. MP24-NAT on HBV, HCV, and HIV was not cost-effective compared to the other screening strategies evaluated for the Netherlands. Large regional differences in cost-effectiveness were found for Thailand. Conclusion: The young transfusion recipient population of Ghana in combination with a high risk of viral transmission yields better cost-effectiveness for additional tests. The advanced age of the transfused population of the Netherlands and a small risk of viral transmission gives poor cost-effectiveness for more sensitive screening techniques. It was demonstrated that a global health economic model combined with a Web interface can provide easy access to risk assessment and cost-effectiveness analysis. © 2009 American Association of Blood Banks.en_US
dc.subjectImmunology and Microbiologyen_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleWeb interface-supported transmission risk assessment and cost-effectiveness analysis of postdonation screening: A global model applied to Ghana, Thailand, and the Netherlandsen_US
dc.typeJournalen_US
article.title.sourcetitleTransfusionen_US
article.volume49en_US
article.stream.affiliationsUniversity of Groningenen_US
article.stream.affiliationsMartini Hospitalen_US
article.stream.affiliationsHealth Economics Consultancy and Technology Assessments (HECTA)en_US
article.stream.affiliationsBaseCase GmbH Decision Support Softwareen_US
article.stream.affiliationsUniversity of Ghanaen_US
article.stream.affiliationsPrince of Songkla Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsMahidol Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsChiang Mai Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsSanquin Consulting Servicesen_US
Appears in Collections:CMUL: Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in CMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.