Volume 17, Issue 1 (3-2023)
payavard 2023, 17(1): 70-85 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IR.MUI.RESEARCH.REC.1398.362
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Fatehi K, Rahimi F, Rezayatmand R. Economic Burden of Colorectal Cancer: A Scoping Review. payavard 2023; 17 (1) :70-85
URL: http://payavard.tums.ac.ir/article-1-7404-en.html
URL: http://payavard.tums.ac.ir/article-1-7404-en.html
1- Master of Science in Health Economics, School of Management and Medical Information Sciences, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
2- Assistant Professor, Health Management and Economics Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
3- Associate Professor, Health Management and Economics Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran ,r.rezayatmand@mng.mui.ac.ir
2- Assistant Professor, Health Management and Economics Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
3- Associate Professor, Health Management and Economics Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran ,
Abstract: (1004 Views)
Background and Aim: Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers that its incidence and prevalence and so deaths due to this cancer have increased worldwide recently. This study examines the economic burden of colorectal cancer from different perspectives by conducting a scoping review.
Materials and Methods: In this scoping review, by searching Scopus, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science, the articles reporting the costs of CRC were reviewed. The search was limited to those published in the past years leading up to 2020. In addition to categorizing different aspects of the reviewed paper, per capita costs were adjusted with the purchasing power parity in order to make some comparisons possible. In this study, the calculated costs of retrieved studies were categorized based on the perspective of each study.
Results: Out of 29 studies, only two have reported indirect costs of CRC, and 4 studies have reported both direct and indirect costs. In other studies, only direct costs of CRC have been reported. Nearly 40% of studies calculated CRC costs from the provider’s perspective. The highest reported annual per-patient cost was $175020(PPP-adjusted) which is related to the average annual costs of patients with CRC at the fourth stage in the United States from a provider perspective. The lowest reported amount was $ 954(PPP-adjusted) which was related to average annual inpatient costs in Brazil from a provider perspective.
Conclusion: Due to variations in study characteristics in terms of perspective, type of costs, type of patient included, etc. any comparison between the economic burden of CRC should be made with caution. However, reviewing various aspects of the economic burden of CRC reported in included studies, will provide researchers and policymakers with a better insight into the CRC burden while designing intervention programs will reduce the budget impact of the those programs.
Materials and Methods: In this scoping review, by searching Scopus, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science, the articles reporting the costs of CRC were reviewed. The search was limited to those published in the past years leading up to 2020. In addition to categorizing different aspects of the reviewed paper, per capita costs were adjusted with the purchasing power parity in order to make some comparisons possible. In this study, the calculated costs of retrieved studies were categorized based on the perspective of each study.
Results: Out of 29 studies, only two have reported indirect costs of CRC, and 4 studies have reported both direct and indirect costs. In other studies, only direct costs of CRC have been reported. Nearly 40% of studies calculated CRC costs from the provider’s perspective. The highest reported annual per-patient cost was $175020(PPP-adjusted) which is related to the average annual costs of patients with CRC at the fourth stage in the United States from a provider perspective. The lowest reported amount was $ 954(PPP-adjusted) which was related to average annual inpatient costs in Brazil from a provider perspective.
Conclusion: Due to variations in study characteristics in terms of perspective, type of costs, type of patient included, etc. any comparison between the economic burden of CRC should be made with caution. However, reviewing various aspects of the economic burden of CRC reported in included studies, will provide researchers and policymakers with a better insight into the CRC burden while designing intervention programs will reduce the budget impact of the those programs.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
