Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Antenatal Screening for Major Structural Anomalies During the First Trimester of Pregnancy: A Decision Model

IF 4.3 1区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Pub Date : 2025-01-21 DOI:10.1111/1471-0528.18053
Helen E. Campbell, Jehan N. Karim, Aris T. Papageorghiou, Edward C. F. Wilson, Oliver Rivero-Arias, the ACCEPTS Study
{"title":"Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Antenatal Screening for Major Structural Anomalies During the First Trimester of Pregnancy: A Decision Model","authors":"Helen E. Campbell,&nbsp;Jehan N. Karim,&nbsp;Aris T. Papageorghiou,&nbsp;Edward C. F. Wilson,&nbsp;Oliver Rivero-Arias,&nbsp;the ACCEPTS Study","doi":"10.1111/1471-0528.18053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To assess the cost-effectiveness of modifying current antenatal screening by adding first trimester structural anomaly screening to standard of care second trimester anomaly screening.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design</h3>\n \n <p>Health economic decision model.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Setting</h3>\n \n <p>National Health Service (NHS) in England and Wales.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Population</h3>\n \n <p>Pregnant women attending for first trimester antenatal screening.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The decision model estimated pregnancy outcomes (maternal and foetal) and 20-year costs for current screening practice and for a policy adding a protocol screening for eight major structural anomalies to the current first trimester ultrasound scan. Event probabilities, costs, and outcomes for the model were informed by meta-analyses, published literature, and expert opinion.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main Outcomes Measures</h3>\n \n <p>Expected numbers of pregnancy outcomes, healthcare costs, and maternal quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Estimation of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), likelihood of cost-effectiveness, and a value of information (VoI) analysis assessing if further research is needed before making a decision about screening.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>First trimester anomaly screening increased mean per woman costs by £11 (95% CI £1–£29) and maternal QALYs by 0.002065 (95% CI 0.00056–0.00358). The ICER was £5270 per QALY and the probability of cost-effectiveness at a willingness to pay value for a QALY of £20 000, exceeded 95%. VoI analysis showed further research would be unlikely to represent value for money. The protocol would likely lead to a reduction in infant healthcare costs and QALYs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>A protocol to screen for eight major structural anomalies during the first trimester appears to represent value for money for the NHS. The opposing implications for mothers and infants, however, raise complex, challenging, and sensitive issues.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50729,"journal":{"name":"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","volume":"132 5","pages":"638-647"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1471-0528.18053","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1471-0528.18053","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To assess the cost-effectiveness of modifying current antenatal screening by adding first trimester structural anomaly screening to standard of care second trimester anomaly screening.

Design

Health economic decision model.

Setting

National Health Service (NHS) in England and Wales.

Population

Pregnant women attending for first trimester antenatal screening.

Methods

The decision model estimated pregnancy outcomes (maternal and foetal) and 20-year costs for current screening practice and for a policy adding a protocol screening for eight major structural anomalies to the current first trimester ultrasound scan. Event probabilities, costs, and outcomes for the model were informed by meta-analyses, published literature, and expert opinion.

Main Outcomes Measures

Expected numbers of pregnancy outcomes, healthcare costs, and maternal quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Estimation of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), likelihood of cost-effectiveness, and a value of information (VoI) analysis assessing if further research is needed before making a decision about screening.

Results

First trimester anomaly screening increased mean per woman costs by £11 (95% CI £1–£29) and maternal QALYs by 0.002065 (95% CI 0.00056–0.00358). The ICER was £5270 per QALY and the probability of cost-effectiveness at a willingness to pay value for a QALY of £20 000, exceeded 95%. VoI analysis showed further research would be unlikely to represent value for money. The protocol would likely lead to a reduction in infant healthcare costs and QALYs.

Conclusions

A protocol to screen for eight major structural anomalies during the first trimester appears to represent value for money for the NHS. The opposing implications for mothers and infants, however, raise complex, challenging, and sensitive issues.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
评估主要结构异常产前筛查在妊娠前三个月的成本效益:决策模型
通过在标准的妊娠中期异常筛查中增加妊娠早期结构异常筛查,来评估修改现行产前筛查的成本效益。
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
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
5.20%
发文量
345
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BJOG is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). The Journal publishes original, peer-reviewed work in all areas of obstetrics and gynaecology, including contraception, urogynaecology, fertility, oncology and clinical practice. Its aim is to publish the highest quality medical research in women''s health, worldwide.
期刊最新文献
Author Reply. Effectiveness of Virtual Reality for Pain Relief in Procedures Related to Obstetrics and Gynaecology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials. Author Reply. Bereavement Care Experiences of Mothers Following Stillbirth and Neonatal Death: A Latent Class Analysis. Author Reply.
×
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:604180095
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