Article
Author(s):
Other highly ranked services included alcohol screening, aspirin therapy for cardiovascular disease prevention, and colorectal cancer screening.
Clinical preventive services provide useful and cost-effective interventions. Evidence-based preventive health service rankings were recently updated by the National Commission on Prevention Priorities (NCPP), which highlight the most valuable and effective preventive strategies.
Childhood vaccination and smoking prevention and cessation counseling topped the list as the most useful and cost-effective interventions among the 28 assessed interventions. Other highly ranked services included alcohol screening, aspirin therapy for cardiovascular disease prevention, and colorectal cancer screening. Meningococcal immunization in preteen children and one-time Tdap/Td booster vaccination came in last.
The NCPP teamed up with HealthPartnersInstitute to compile rankings based on the relative health impact and cost effectiveness of evidence-based preventive services. Each service was assessed based on preventable clinical burden and its cost-effectiveness on a scale of 1-5 points. The report, published in the Annals of Family Medicine, updates the 2006 ranking.
Childhood immunization, youth tobacco prevention counseling, and tobacco screening and cessation counseling all received a combined ranking score of 10, the highest combined score in the report.
Services ranked the lowest included herpes zoster vaccination in older adults, osteoporosis screening, folic acid chemotherapy prior to pregnancy, meningococcal immunization in adolescents, and Tdap/Td booster immunization.
The updated rankings serve as a useful guideline in prioritizing preventive services that generate the most benefits and cost-effectiveness. Health care providers can use the updated list to make informed decisions on best-valued preventive interventions.
Reference:
Maciosek MV, LaFrance AB, Dehmer SP, et al. Updated Priorities Among Effective Clinical Preventive Services. Ann Fam Med. 2017;15(1):14-22. doi: 10.1370/afm.2017