Fax: (507) 266-9936
Version of Record online: 6 APR 2012
Copyright © 2012 American Cancer Society
Supplement: A Prospective Surveillance Model for Rehabilitation for Women With Breast Cancer
Volume 118, Issue Supplement 8, pages 2325–2330, 15 April 2012
How to Cite
Cheville, A. L., Nyman, J. A., Pruthi, S. and Basford, J. R. (2012), Cost considerations regarding the prospective surveillance model for breast cancer survivors. Cancer, 118: 2325–2330. doi: 10.1002/cncr.27473
The articles in this supplement were commissioned based on presentations and deliberations at a Roundtable Meeting on a Prospective Model of Care for Breast Cancer Rehabilitation, held February 24-25, 2011, at the American Cancer Society National Home Office in Atlanta, Georgia.
The opinions or views expressed in this supplement are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or recommendations of the editors or the American Cancer Society.
A Prospective Surveillance Model for Rehabilitation for Women with Breast Cancer, Supplement to Cancer
Re-use of this article is permitted in accordance with the Terms and Conditions set out at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com/onlineopen#OnlineOpen_Terms
- Issue online: 6 APR 2012
- Version of Record online: 6 APR 2012
- Manuscript Accepted: 7 NOV 2011
- Manuscript Received: 20 OCT 2011
- breast cancer;
- physical impairment;
- cost effectiveness;
For this article, the authors examined the cost implications of the prospective surveillance model (PSM) for breast cancer (BC) survivors, a comprehensive framework designed to preemptively reduce the incidence and virulence of common impairments. The model clearly has the potential of providing significant benefits. However, its accompanying costs and resource requirements remain unclear and may be substantial. Thus, it is critical to examine which BC survivors may benefit from the PSM, how much they will benefit, and the costs of this benefit before its implementation. Because the PSM is not rigidly prescriptive, its examination must allow for different scenarios with emphasis on 4 critical determinants of cost—whether all or only high-risk BC survivors participate, assessment frequencies and locations, the credentials of the assessors, and requirements for supportive equipment. Another issue is the distribution of its cost: hypothetical implementation strategies vary widely in their distribution of fiscal burden across key stakeholders—survivors, providers, and payers—whose financial responsibilities will be an important factor in whether and how rapidly they adopt the PSM. Accurate valuation of the PSM will require capture of direct and indirect cost savings and benefits. Currently, a lack of data regarding these parameters, as well as outcomes that can be reliably attributed to the PSM, impedes cost-effectiveness analyses. Because the PSM may enhance many health state characteristics, assessments that integrate overall composite measures with evaluations of common, discrete impairments may be required to comprehensively assess its benefits. Cancer 2012;118(8 suppl):. © 2012 American Cancer Society.