Cost-effectiveness analysis of parenteral iron therapy compared to oral iron supplements in managing iron deficiency anemia among pregnant women.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-01-02 DOI:10.1186/s13561-023-00474-3
Somen Saha, Devang Raval, Komal Shah, Deepak Saxena
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness analysis of parenteral iron therapy compared to oral iron supplements in managing iron deficiency anemia among pregnant women.","authors":"Somen Saha, Devang Raval, Komal Shah, Deepak Saxena","doi":"10.1186/s13561-023-00474-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study compared the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of parenteral iron, using intravenous iron sucrose (IVIS) therapy against the standard regimen of oral iron (OI) therapy for managing iron-deficiency anemia (IDA) among pregnant women in a natural primary care setting in Gujarat.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A prospective cost-effectiveness study was conducted in natural programme setting wherein 188 pregnant women in their 14 to 18 weeks with moderate and severe anemia women enrolled from two districts of Gujarat, and 142 were followed up until the post-partum phase. The intervention group comprised of 82 participants who were administered IVIS, while the comparison group comprised of 106 participants who were put on OI therapy. Hemoglobin (Hb) levels were measured at periodic intervals, first during enrollment and then during each month of pregnancy period and finally on the 42nd day of the post-natal period.</p><p><strong>Outcome measures: </strong>Change in mean Hb level from baseline was the primary outcome, while the incidence of morbidity and mortality was a secondary outcome measure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The intervention group showed a significant incremental mean change in Hb level from 8.2 g/dl to 11.45 g/dl at the fourth follow-up, while the control group's mean Hb level reduced from 9.99 g/dl to 9.55 g/dl. The discounted cost per beneficiary for IVIS was US$ 87, while that for OI was US$ 49. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was US$ 9.84, which is 0.049% of India's per capita GDP.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>IVIS therapy was more clinically effective and cost-effective than OI therapy among pregnant women for management of moderate and severe anemia.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10759557/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-023-00474-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study compared the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of parenteral iron, using intravenous iron sucrose (IVIS) therapy against the standard regimen of oral iron (OI) therapy for managing iron-deficiency anemia (IDA) among pregnant women in a natural primary care setting in Gujarat.

Design: A prospective cost-effectiveness study was conducted in natural programme setting wherein 188 pregnant women in their 14 to 18 weeks with moderate and severe anemia women enrolled from two districts of Gujarat, and 142 were followed up until the post-partum phase. The intervention group comprised of 82 participants who were administered IVIS, while the comparison group comprised of 106 participants who were put on OI therapy. Hemoglobin (Hb) levels were measured at periodic intervals, first during enrollment and then during each month of pregnancy period and finally on the 42nd day of the post-natal period.

Outcome measures: Change in mean Hb level from baseline was the primary outcome, while the incidence of morbidity and mortality was a secondary outcome measure.

Results: The intervention group showed a significant incremental mean change in Hb level from 8.2 g/dl to 11.45 g/dl at the fourth follow-up, while the control group's mean Hb level reduced from 9.99 g/dl to 9.55 g/dl. The discounted cost per beneficiary for IVIS was US$ 87, while that for OI was US$ 49. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was US$ 9.84, which is 0.049% of India's per capita GDP.

Conclusion: IVIS therapy was more clinically effective and cost-effective than OI therapy among pregnant women for management of moderate and severe anemia.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在治疗孕妇缺铁性贫血方面,肠外铁剂疗法与口服铁剂补充剂的成本效益分析。
研究目的本研究比较了在古吉拉特邦的自然初级保健环境中,采用静脉注射蔗糖铁剂(IVIS)疗法和口服铁剂(OI)标准疗法治疗孕妇缺铁性贫血(IDA)的临床疗效和成本效益:在古吉拉特邦的两个地区开展了一项前瞻性成本效益研究,共招募了 188 名 14 至 18 周患有中度和重度贫血的孕妇,并对 142 名孕妇进行了产后随访。干预组中有 82 人接受了 IVIS 治疗,对比组中有 106 人接受了 OI 治疗。对血红蛋白(Hb)水平进行定期测量,首先在入组时测量,然后在孕期的每个月测量,最后在产后第42天测量:结果:平均血红蛋白水平与基线相比的变化是主要结果,发病率和死亡率是次要结果:结果:干预组的平均血红蛋白水平从 8.2 克/分升大幅上升至第四次随访时的 11.45 克/分升,而对照组的平均血红蛋白水平则从 9.99 克/分升下降至 9.55 克/分升。IVIS每位受益人的贴现成本为87美元,而OI为49美元。增量成本效益比(ICER)为9.84美元,相当于印度人均GDP的0.049%:结论:在治疗孕妇中度和重度贫血方面,IVIS疗法比OI疗法更具有临床效果和成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1