Akker-van Marle ME, Rijnders MEB, Dommelen P, Fekkes M, Wouwe JP, Amelink-Verburg MP, Verkerk PH. Cost-effectiveness of different treatment strategies with intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent early-onset group B streptococcal disease.
BJOG 2005;
112:820-6. [PMID:
15924544 DOI:
10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00555.x]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the costs and effects of different treatment strategies with intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent early-onset group B streptococcal (GBS) disease in the Netherlands. The treatment strategies include a risk-based strategy, a screening-based strategy, a combined screening/risk-based strategy and the current Dutch guideline.
DESIGN
Cost-effectiveness analysis based on decision model.
SETTING
Obstetric care system in the Netherlands.
POPULATION/SAMPLE
Hypothetical cohort of 200,000 neonates.
METHODS
A decision analysis model was used to compare the costs and effects of different treatment strategies with no treatment. Baseline estimates were derived from literature and a survey among parents of children affected by GBS disease. The analysis was performed from a societal perspective, and costs and effects were discounted at a percentage of 3%. Main outcome measures Cost per quality adjusted of life-year (QALY).
RESULT
The risk-based strategy will prevent 352 cases of early-onset GBS for 5.0 million Euros, indicating a cost-effectiveness ratio of 7600 Euros per QALY gained. The combined screening risk-based strategy has comparable results. The current Dutch guideline resulted in lower effects for higher costs. The screening-based strategy shows the highest reduction in cases of early-onset GBS, however, at a cost-effectiveness ratio of 59,300 Euros per QALY gained. Introducing the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test may lead to a more favourable cost-effectiveness ratio.
CONCLUSION
In the Dutch system, the combined screening/risk-based strategy and the risk-based strategy have reasonable cost-effectiveness ratios. If it becomes feasible to add the PCR test, the cost-effectiveness of the combined screening/risk-based strategy may even be more favourable.
Collapse