首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Economic analysis comparing induction of labour and expectant management for intrauterine growth restriction at term (DIGITAT trial)
Authors:Sylvia M.C. Vijgen  Kim E. Boers  Brent C. Opmeer  Denise Bijlenga  Dick J. Bekedam  Kitty W.M. Bloemenkamp  Karin de Boer  Henk A. Bremer  Saskia le Cessie  Friso M.C. Delemarre  Johannes J. Duvekot  Tom H.M. Hasaart  Anneke Kwee  Jan M.M. van Lith  Claudia A. van Meir  Maria G. van Pampus  Joris A.M. van der Post  Monique Rijken  Frans J.M.E. Roumen  Paulien C.M. van der Salm  Marc E.A. Spaanderman  Christine Willekes  Ella J. Wijnen  Ben W.J. Mol  Sicco A. Scherjon
Affiliation:1. Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;2. Leiden University Medical Centre, The Netherlands;3. Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;4. Hospital Rijnstate, Arnhem, The Netherlands;5. Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, The Netherlands;6. Elkerliek Hospital, Helmond, The Netherlands;g Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands;h Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands;i University Medical Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands;j Groene Hart Hospital, Gouda, The Netherlands;k University Medical Centre, Groningen, The Netherlands;l Atrium Medical Centre, Heerlen, The Netherlands;m Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, The Netherlands;n University Medical Centre St Radboud, Nijmegen, The Netherlands;o Maastricht University Medical Centre, The Netherlands;p VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, The Netherlands;q Maxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands
Abstract:

Objective

Pregnancies complicated by intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) are at increased risk for neonatal morbidity and mortality. The Dutch nationwide disproportionate intrauterine growth intervention trial at term (DIGITAT trial) showed that induction of labour and expectant monitoring were comparable with respect to composite adverse neonatal outcome and operative delivery. In this study we compare the costs of both strategies.

Study design

A cost analysis was performed alongside the DIGITAT trial, which was a randomized controlled trial in which 650 women with a singleton pregnancy with suspected IUGR beyond 36 weeks of pregnancy were allocated to induction or expectant management. Resource utilization was documented by specific items in the case report forms. Unit costs for clinical resources were calculated from the financial reports of participating hospitals. For primary care costs Dutch standardized prices were used. All costs are presented in Euros converted to the year 2009.

Results

Antepartum expectant monitoring generated more costs, mainly due to longer antepartum maternal stays in hospital. During delivery and the postpartum stage, induction generated more direct medical costs, due to longer stay in the labour room and longer duration of neonatal high care/medium care admissions. From a health care perspective, both strategies generated comparable costs: on average €7106 per patient for the induction group (N = 321) and €6995 for the expectant management group (N = 329) with a cost difference of €111 (95%CI: €−1296 to 1641).

Conclusion

Induction of labour and expectant monitoring in IUGR at term have comparable outcomes immediately after birth in terms of obstetrical outcomes, maternal quality of life and costs. Costs are lower, however, in the expectant monitoring group before 38 weeks of gestation and costs are lower in the induction of labour group after 38 weeks of gestation. So if induction of labour is considered to pre-empt possible stillbirth in suspected IUGR, it is reasonable to delay until 38 weeks, with watchful monitoring.
Keywords:IUGR, intrauterine growth restriction   DIGITAT, Disproportionate Intrauterine Growth Intervention Trial at Term   IQR, inter quartile range   IC, intensive care   HC, high care   MC, medium care
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号