1996Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent MedicineRequires access

A Comparison of Screening Strategies for Elevated Blood Lead Levels

James R. Campbell

Open publisher page 7 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To calculate and compare the average expected cost per child screened (hereafter referred to as COST) among various screening strategies. DESIGN: A decision analysis of 5 strategies: (1) conduct risk assessment and screen high-risk children by venipuncture, low-risk children by fingerstick; (2) screen all children by fingerstick; (3) screen all children by venipuncture; (4) conduct risk assessment, screen high-risk children by fingerstick; and (5) conduct risk assessment, screen high-risk children by venipuncture. We assumed all fingerstick blood lead levels of 0.72 mumol/L or higher (> or = 15 micrograms/dL) would be confirmed by venipuncture. Baseline variables taken from the literature included prevalence of elevated blood lead levels in the pediatric population (2%), sensitivity and specificity of fingerstick blood lead assay (90% each), specificity of risk assessment (50%), sensitivity of risk assessment at blood lead levels of 0.48 to 0.68 mumol/L (10-14 micrograms/dL) and 0.72 mumol/L or higher (> or = 15 micrograms/dL) (65% and 85%, respectively), cost of blood lead assay ($6), cost to obtain blood by venipuncture ($4) and fingerstick ($2), and cost to get a child who has a fingerstick blood lead level of 0.72 mumol/L or higher (> or = 15 micrograms/dL) to return ($0.18). Sensitivity analysis determined whether selected variables affected the COST. RESULTS: The COSTs for strategies 1 through 5 were $9.07, $8.16, $10, $4.13, and $5.04, respectively. Among the universal strategies, screening children by fingerstick had the lowest COST at a prevalence of less than 38% and fingerstick blood lead assay a specificity of greater than 62%. Among the selective strategies, screening high-risk children by fingerstick had the lowest COST at a prevalence of less than 38% and fingerstick blood lead an assay specificity of greater than 63%. CONCLUSION: At a readily attainable specificity of the fingerstick blood lead assay, practices serving a patient population with a prevalence of elevated blood lead levels of less than 38% will have the lowest COST when a fingerstick screening strategy is used.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To calculate and compare the average expected cost per child screened (hereafter referred to as COST) among various screening strategies. DESIGN: A decision analysis of 5 strategies: (1) conduct risk assessment and screen high-risk children by venipuncture, low-risk children by fingerstick; (2) screen all children by fingerstick; (3) screen all children by venipuncture; (4) conduct risk assessment, screen high-risk children by fingerstick; and (5) conduct risk assessment, screen high-risk children by venipuncture. We assumed all fingerstick blood lead levels of 0.72 mumol/L or higher (> or = 15 micrograms/dL) would be confirmed by venipuncture. Baseline variables taken from the literature included prevalence of elevated blood lead levels in the pediatric population (2%), sensitivity and specificity of fingerstick blood lead assay (90% each), specificity of risk assessment (50%), sensitivity of risk assessment at blood lead levels of 0.48 to 0.68 mumol/L (10-14 micrograms/dL) and 0.72 mumol/L or higher (> or = 15 micrograms/dL) (65% and 85%, respectively), cost of blood lead assay ($6), cost to obtain blood by venipuncture ($4) and fingerstick ($2), and cost to get a child who has a fingerstick blood lead level of 0.72 mumol/L or higher (> or = 15 micrograms/dL) to return ($0.18). Sensitivity analysis determined whether selected variables affected the COST. RESULTS: The COSTs for strategies 1 through 5 were $9.07, $8.16, $10, $4.13, and $5.04, respectively. Among the universal strategies, screening children by fingerstick had the lowest COST at a prevalence of less than 38% and fingerstick blood lead assay a specificity of greater than 62%. Among the selective strategies, screening high-risk children by fingerstick had the lowest COST at a prevalence of less than 38% and fingerstick blood lead an assay specificity of greater than 63%. CONCLUSION: At a readily attainable specificity of the fingerstick blood lead assay, practices serving a patient population with a prevalence of elevated blood lead levels of less than 38% will have the lowest COST when a fingerstick screening strategy is used.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 7 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To calculate and compare the average expected cost per child screened (hereafter referred to as COST) among various screening strategies. DESIGN: A decision analysis of 5 strategies: (1) conduct risk assessment and screen high-risk children by venipuncture, low-risk children by fingerstick; (2) screen all children by fingerstick; (3) screen all children by venipuncture; (4) conduct risk assessment, screen high-risk children by fingerstick; and (5) conduct risk assessment, screen high-risk children by venipuncture. We assumed all fingerstick blood lead levels of 0.72 mumol/L or higher (> or = 15 micrograms/dL) would be confirmed by venipuncture. Baseline variables taken from the literature included prevalence of elevated blood lead levels in the pediatric population (2%), sensitivity and specificity of fingerstick blood lead assay (90% each), specificity of risk assessment (50%), sensitivity of risk assessment at blood lead levels of 0.48 to 0.68 mumol/L (10-14 micrograms/dL) and 0.72 mumol/L or higher (> or = 15 micrograms/dL) (65% and 85%, respectively), cost of blood lead assay ($6), cost to obtain blood by venipuncture ($4) and fingerstick ($2), and cost to get a child who has a fingerstick blood lead level of 0.72 mumol/L or higher (> or = 15 micrograms/dL) to return ($0.18). Sensitivity analysis determined whether selected variables affected the COST. RESULTS: The COSTs for strategies 1 through 5 were $9.07, $8.16, $10, $4.13, and $5.04, respectively. Among the universal strategies, screening children by fingerstick had the lowest COST at a prevalence of less than 38% and fingerstick blood lead assay a specificity of greater than 62%. Among the selective strategies, screening high-risk children by fingerstick had the lowest COST at a prevalence of less than 38% and fingerstick blood lead an assay specificity of greater than 63%. CONCLUSION: At a readily attainable specificity of the fingerstick blood lead assay, practices serving a patient population with a prevalence of elevated blood lead levels of less than 38% will have the lowest COST when a fingerstick screening strategy is used.

Key concepts: Fingerstick, Venipuncture, Medicine, Pediatrics, Internal medicine, Surgery, Endocrinology, Diabetes mellitus

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A Comparison of Screening Strategies for Elevated Blood Lead Levels — Research Paper | ScholarLens