Abstract
The authors of the paper ‘Costeffectiveness of a community-based screening programme for chronic atrial fibrillation in Japan’ 1 aimed to perform a cost-utility analysis of an annual community screening programme and to compare three strategies: annual screening with ECG, annual screening with pulse palpation for arrhythmia followed by ECG when arrhythmia was detected, and no screening. The authors attempted to estimate costs for the screening programmes retrospectively, using literature reviews from different countries, National Authority reports on salaries and budgetary line items. This is not appropriate for economic evaluation because not all costs are taken into account and the method can lead to misinterpretation of the real cost of intervention. 2
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
