TY - JOUR
T1 - Budget impact analysis of chronic kidney disease mass screening test in Japan
AU - Kondo, Masahide
AU - Yamagata, Kunihiro
AU - Hoshi, Shu Ling
AU - Saito, Chie
AU - Asahi, Koichi
AU - Moriyama, Toshiki
AU - Tsuruya, Kazuhiko
AU - Konta, Tsuneo
AU - Fujimoto, Shouichi
AU - Narita, Ichiei
AU - Kimura, Kenjiro
AU - Iseki, Kunitoshi
AU - Watanabe, Tsuyoshi
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by Health and Labour Sciences Research Grants for ‘‘Research on the positioning of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in Specific Health Check and Guidance in Japan’’ (H20-circulatory(lifestyle)-ippan-008), “Design of the comprehensive health care system for chronic kidney disease (CKD) based on the individual risk assessment by specific health checkup” (H24-intractible(renal)-ippan-006), and a grant for strategic outcome study project for renal disease (H19-renal disease-senryaku-001), the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2014, The Author(s).
PY - 2014/12/12
Y1 - 2014/12/12
N2 - Background: Our recently published cost-effectiveness study on chronic kidney disease mass screening test in Japan evaluated the use of dipstick test, serum creatinine (Cr) assay or both in specific health checkup (SHC). Mandating the use of serum Cr assay additionally, or the continuation of current policy mandating dipstick test only was found cost-effective. This study aims to examine the affordability of previously suggested reforms.Methods: Budget impact analysis was conducted assuming the economic model would be good for 15 years and applying a population projection. Costs expended by social insurers without discounting were counted as budgets.Results: Annual budget impacts of mass screening compared with do-nothing scenario were calculated as ¥79–¥−1,067 million for dipstick test only, ¥2,505–¥9,235 million for serum Cr assay only and ¥2,517–¥9,251 million for the use of both during a 15-year period. Annual budget impacts associated with the reforms were calculated as ¥975–¥4,129 million for mandating serum Cr assay in addition to the currently used mandatory dipstick test, and ¥963–¥4,113 million for mandating serum Cr assay only and abandoning dipstick test.Conclusions: Estimated values associated with the reform from ¥963–¥4,129 million per year over 15 years are considerable amounts of money under limited resources. The most impressive finding of this study is the decreasing additional expenditures in dipstick test only scenario. This suggests that current policy which mandates dipstick test only would contain medical care expenditure.
AB - Background: Our recently published cost-effectiveness study on chronic kidney disease mass screening test in Japan evaluated the use of dipstick test, serum creatinine (Cr) assay or both in specific health checkup (SHC). Mandating the use of serum Cr assay additionally, or the continuation of current policy mandating dipstick test only was found cost-effective. This study aims to examine the affordability of previously suggested reforms.Methods: Budget impact analysis was conducted assuming the economic model would be good for 15 years and applying a population projection. Costs expended by social insurers without discounting were counted as budgets.Results: Annual budget impacts of mass screening compared with do-nothing scenario were calculated as ¥79–¥−1,067 million for dipstick test only, ¥2,505–¥9,235 million for serum Cr assay only and ¥2,517–¥9,251 million for the use of both during a 15-year period. Annual budget impacts associated with the reforms were calculated as ¥975–¥4,129 million for mandating serum Cr assay in addition to the currently used mandatory dipstick test, and ¥963–¥4,113 million for mandating serum Cr assay only and abandoning dipstick test.Conclusions: Estimated values associated with the reform from ¥963–¥4,129 million per year over 15 years are considerable amounts of money under limited resources. The most impressive finding of this study is the decreasing additional expenditures in dipstick test only scenario. This suggests that current policy which mandates dipstick test only would contain medical care expenditure.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84919838538&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84919838538&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10157-014-0943-8
DO - 10.1007/s10157-014-0943-8
M3 - Article
C2 - 24515308
AN - SCOPUS:84919838538
SN - 1342-1751
VL - 18
SP - 885
EP - 891
JO - Clinical and Experimental Nephrology
JF - Clinical and Experimental Nephrology
IS - 6
ER -