新生儿先天性巨细胞病毒筛查

Cadth
{"title":"新生儿先天性巨细胞病毒筛查","authors":"Cadth","doi":"10.51731/cjht.2024.895","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What Is the Issue? \n \nCongenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV) is estimated to affect between 0.2% and 2.4% of newborns worldwide, and may cause long-term effects, including hearing loss and neurodevelopmental disability. \nNewborn screening for cCMV can identify affected neonates and provide an opportunity for early treatment, which may reduce any long-term effects from infection. \nWe wanted to know if universal newborn screening is a clinically effective and cost-effective intervention for identifying and managing cCMV. \n \nWhat Did We Do? \n \nWe identified and summarized published literature comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of universal newborn screening with either targeted newborn screening or no screening for congenital cytomegalovirus in neonates. We also identified and summarized published, evidence-based guidelines that make recommendations concerning the use of newborn screening for congenital cytomegalovirus to help inform decisions considering the use of this intervention. \nAn information specialist searched for peer-reviewed and grey literature sources published between January 1, 2014, and March 19, 2024. The search was limited to English-language documents. One reviewer screened articles for eligibility based on predefined criteria, critically appraised the included studies, and narratively summarized the findings. \n \nWhat Did We Find? \n \nEvidence from 1 prospective cohort study in the US found that, compared to universal newborn screening for cCMV, targeted newborn screening failed to identify a significant proportion of neonates who developed hearing loss associated with infection. \nThree cost-effectiveness evaluations concluded that universal newborn screening for cCMV was cost-effective when compared to targeted newborn screening or no screening. None of these analyses were specific to the Canadian context. \nWhile 1 of 3 evidence-based guidelines identified by this review makes a recommendation favouring universal newborn screening for cCMV, 2 evidence-based guidelines recommend against the implementation of universal newborn screening for cCMV (including 1 from the Canadian context), generally citing a lack of sufficient clinical evidence. \n \nWhat Does This Mean? \n \nThe included cost-effectiveness studies and evidence-based guidelines in this report emphasize that limited clinical evidence is currently available to inform decision-making concerning newborn screening for cCMV. \nJurisdictions where universal newborn screening for cCMV has been implemented provide an opportunity for clinical research to support and inform future decision-making. \nThe current limitation of available clinical data describing newborn screening for cCMV will require decision-makers to draw from a broader set of inputs and sources than those available from empirical studies. \n","PeriodicalId":505661,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Health Technologies","volume":"32 13","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Newborn Screening for Congenital Cytomegalovirus\",\"authors\":\"Cadth\",\"doi\":\"10.51731/cjht.2024.895\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"What Is the Issue? \\n \\nCongenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV) is estimated to affect between 0.2% and 2.4% of newborns worldwide, and may cause long-term effects, including hearing loss and neurodevelopmental disability. \\nNewborn screening for cCMV can identify affected neonates and provide an opportunity for early treatment, which may reduce any long-term effects from infection. \\nWe wanted to know if universal newborn screening is a clinically effective and cost-effective intervention for identifying and managing cCMV. \\n \\nWhat Did We Do? \\n \\nWe identified and summarized published literature comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of universal newborn screening with either targeted newborn screening or no screening for congenital cytomegalovirus in neonates. We also identified and summarized published, evidence-based guidelines that make recommendations concerning the use of newborn screening for congenital cytomegalovirus to help inform decisions considering the use of this intervention. \\nAn information specialist searched for peer-reviewed and grey literature sources published between January 1, 2014, and March 19, 2024. The search was limited to English-language documents. One reviewer screened articles for eligibility based on predefined criteria, critically appraised the included studies, and narratively summarized the findings. \\n \\nWhat Did We Find? \\n \\nEvidence from 1 prospective cohort study in the US found that, compared to universal newborn screening for cCMV, targeted newborn screening failed to identify a significant proportion of neonates who developed hearing loss associated with infection. \\nThree cost-effectiveness evaluations concluded that universal newborn screening for cCMV was cost-effective when compared to targeted newborn screening or no screening. None of these analyses were specific to the Canadian context. \\nWhile 1 of 3 evidence-based guidelines identified by this review makes a recommendation favouring universal newborn screening for cCMV, 2 evidence-based guidelines recommend against the implementation of universal newborn screening for cCMV (including 1 from the Canadian context), generally citing a lack of sufficient clinical evidence. \\n \\nWhat Does This Mean? \\n \\nThe included cost-effectiveness studies and evidence-based guidelines in this report emphasize that limited clinical evidence is currently available to inform decision-making concerning newborn screening for cCMV. \\nJurisdictions where universal newborn screening for cCMV has been implemented provide an opportunity for clinical research to support and inform future decision-making. \\nThe current limitation of available clinical data describing newborn screening for cCMV will require decision-makers to draw from a broader set of inputs and sources than those available from empirical studies. \\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":505661,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Health Technologies\",\"volume\":\"32 13\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Health Technologies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.51731/cjht.2024.895\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Health Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51731/cjht.2024.895","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

问题是什么? 据估计,全球 0.2% 至 2.4% 的新生儿会感染先天性巨细胞病毒 (cCMV),并可能造成听力损失和神经发育障碍等长期影响。新生儿 cCMV 筛查可以发现受影响的新生儿,并为早期治疗提供机会,从而减少感染带来的长期影响。我们想知道,在识别和管理 cCMV 方面,普遍新生儿筛查是否是一种临床有效且具有成本效益的干预措施。 我们做了什么? 我们确定并总结了已发表的文献,比较了新生儿先天性巨细胞病毒普遍筛查与有针对性的新生儿筛查或不筛查的临床有效性和成本效益。我们还查找并总结了已出版的循证指南,这些指南就新生儿先天性巨细胞病毒筛查的使用提出了建议,有助于为考虑使用该干预措施的决策提供信息。一位信息专家检索了 2014 年 1 月 1 日至 2024 年 3 月 19 日期间发表的同行评审文献和灰色文献。搜索仅限于英文文献。一位审稿人根据预先定义的标准对文章进行了资格筛选,对纳入的研究进行了严格评估,并对研究结果进行了叙述性总结。 我们发现了什么? 来自美国一项前瞻性队列研究的证据发现,与针对 cCMV 的新生儿普遍筛查相比,有针对性的新生儿筛查未能发现相当一部分因感染而出现听力损失的新生儿。三项成本效益评估得出结论,与有针对性的新生儿筛查或不进行筛查相比,针对 cCMV 的普遍新生儿筛查具有成本效益。这些分析均不针对加拿大的具体情况。本综述所确定的 3 份循证指南中,有 1 份建议支持对新生儿普遍进行 cCMV 筛查,但有 2 份循证指南建议不对新生儿普遍进行 cCMV 筛查(其中 1 份来自加拿大),理由通常是缺乏足够的临床证据。 这意味着什么? 本报告中包含的成本效益研究和循证指南强调,目前可用于新生儿 cCMV 筛查决策的临床证据有限。已实施新生儿 cCMV 普遍筛查的地区为临床研究提供了机会,以支持和指导未来的决策。目前,描述新生儿 cCMV 筛查的临床数据有限,这就要求决策者从比实证研究更广泛的投入和来源中获取信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Newborn Screening for Congenital Cytomegalovirus
What Is the Issue? Congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV) is estimated to affect between 0.2% and 2.4% of newborns worldwide, and may cause long-term effects, including hearing loss and neurodevelopmental disability. Newborn screening for cCMV can identify affected neonates and provide an opportunity for early treatment, which may reduce any long-term effects from infection. We wanted to know if universal newborn screening is a clinically effective and cost-effective intervention for identifying and managing cCMV. What Did We Do? We identified and summarized published literature comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of universal newborn screening with either targeted newborn screening or no screening for congenital cytomegalovirus in neonates. We also identified and summarized published, evidence-based guidelines that make recommendations concerning the use of newborn screening for congenital cytomegalovirus to help inform decisions considering the use of this intervention. An information specialist searched for peer-reviewed and grey literature sources published between January 1, 2014, and March 19, 2024. The search was limited to English-language documents. One reviewer screened articles for eligibility based on predefined criteria, critically appraised the included studies, and narratively summarized the findings. What Did We Find? Evidence from 1 prospective cohort study in the US found that, compared to universal newborn screening for cCMV, targeted newborn screening failed to identify a significant proportion of neonates who developed hearing loss associated with infection. Three cost-effectiveness evaluations concluded that universal newborn screening for cCMV was cost-effective when compared to targeted newborn screening or no screening. None of these analyses were specific to the Canadian context. While 1 of 3 evidence-based guidelines identified by this review makes a recommendation favouring universal newborn screening for cCMV, 2 evidence-based guidelines recommend against the implementation of universal newborn screening for cCMV (including 1 from the Canadian context), generally citing a lack of sufficient clinical evidence. What Does This Mean? The included cost-effectiveness studies and evidence-based guidelines in this report emphasize that limited clinical evidence is currently available to inform decision-making concerning newborn screening for cCMV. Jurisdictions where universal newborn screening for cCMV has been implemented provide an opportunity for clinical research to support and inform future decision-making. The current limitation of available clinical data describing newborn screening for cCMV will require decision-makers to draw from a broader set of inputs and sources than those available from empirical studies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Re-Treatment With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors CRISPR Technologies for In Vivo and Ex Vivo Gene Editing Review of Guidelines on Second-Line Therapy for Patients With Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: A 2024 Update Trends in Public Drug Plan Expenditures for Patients With Crohn Disease and Ulcerative Colitis Initiating Targeted Immune Modulator Therapy National and International Policies on the Use of Biosimilars: An Environmental Scan
×
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