TY - JOUR
T1 - Cost-effectiveness of cardiotocography plus ST analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram compared with cardiotocography only
AU - Vijgen, Sylvia M.C.
AU - Westerhuis, Michelle E.M.H.
AU - Opmeer, Brent C.
AU - Visser, Gerard H.A.
AU - Moons, Karl G.M.
AU - Porath, Martina M.
AU - Oei, Guid S.
AU - Van Geijn, Herman P.
AU - Bolte, Antoinette C.
AU - Willekes, Christine
AU - Nijhuis, Jan G.
AU - Van Beek, Erik
AU - Graziosi, Giuseppe C.M.
AU - Schuitemaker, Nico W.E.
AU - Van Lith, Jan M.M.
AU - Van Den Akker, Eline S.A.
AU - Drogtrop, Addy P.
AU - Van Dessel, Hendrikus J.H.M.
AU - Rijnders, Robbert J.P.
AU - Oosterbaan, Herman P.
AU - Mol, Ben Willem J.
AU - Kwee, Anneke
PY - 2011/7/1
Y1 - 2011/7/1
N2 - Objective. To assess the cost-effectiveness of addition of ST analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram (ECG; STAN®) to cardiotocography (CTG) for fetal surveillance during labor compared with CTG only. Design. Cost-effectiveness analysis based on a randomized clinical trial on ST analysis of the fetal ECG. Setting. Obstetric departments of three academic and six general hospitals in The Netherlands. Population. Laboring women with a singleton high-risk pregnancy, a fetus in cephalic presentation, a gestational age >36weeks and an indication for internal electronic fetal monitoring. Methods. A trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis was performed froma health-care provider perspective. Main Outcome Measures. Primary health outcome was the incidence of metabolic acidosis measured in the umbilical artery. Direct medical costswere estimated fromstart of labor to childbirth.Cost-effectiveness was expressed as costs to prevent one case of metabolic acidosis. Results. The incidence of metabolic acidosis was 0.7% in the ST-analysis group and 1.0% in the CTG-only group (relative risk 0.70; 95% confidence interval 0.38-1.28). Per delivery, the mean costs per patient of CTG plus ST analysis (n = 2 827) were €1 345 vs. €1 316 for CTGonly (n=2 840), with amean difference of€29 (95% confidence interval-€9 to €77) until childbirth. The incremental costs of ST analysis to prevent one case of metabolic acidosis were €9 667. Conclusions. The additional costs of monitoring by ST analysis of the fetal ECG are very limited when compared with monitoring by CTG only and very low compared with the total costs of delivery.
AB - Objective. To assess the cost-effectiveness of addition of ST analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram (ECG; STAN®) to cardiotocography (CTG) for fetal surveillance during labor compared with CTG only. Design. Cost-effectiveness analysis based on a randomized clinical trial on ST analysis of the fetal ECG. Setting. Obstetric departments of three academic and six general hospitals in The Netherlands. Population. Laboring women with a singleton high-risk pregnancy, a fetus in cephalic presentation, a gestational age >36weeks and an indication for internal electronic fetal monitoring. Methods. A trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis was performed froma health-care provider perspective. Main Outcome Measures. Primary health outcome was the incidence of metabolic acidosis measured in the umbilical artery. Direct medical costswere estimated fromstart of labor to childbirth.Cost-effectiveness was expressed as costs to prevent one case of metabolic acidosis. Results. The incidence of metabolic acidosis was 0.7% in the ST-analysis group and 1.0% in the CTG-only group (relative risk 0.70; 95% confidence interval 0.38-1.28). Per delivery, the mean costs per patient of CTG plus ST analysis (n = 2 827) were €1 345 vs. €1 316 for CTGonly (n=2 840), with amean difference of€29 (95% confidence interval-€9 to €77) until childbirth. The incremental costs of ST analysis to prevent one case of metabolic acidosis were €9 667. Conclusions. The additional costs of monitoring by ST analysis of the fetal ECG are very limited when compared with monitoring by CTG only and very low compared with the total costs of delivery.
KW - Cardiotocography
KW - Cost-effectiveness
KW - Fetal surveillance
KW - Labor
KW - ST analysis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79959819927&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1600-0412.2011.01138.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1600-0412.2011.01138.x
M3 - Article
C2 - 21446929
AN - SCOPUS:79959819927
SN - 0001-6349
VL - 90
SP - 772
EP - 778
JO - Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
JF - Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
IS - 7
ER -