Literature DB >> 10719963

Analgesia for labor pain: a cost model.

A Macario1, W C Scibetta, J Navarro, E Riley.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Epidural analgesia and intravenous analgesia with opioids are two techniques for the relief of labor pain. The goal of this study was to develop a cost-identification model to quantify the costs (from society's perspective) of epidural analgesia compared with intravenous analgesia for labor pain. Because there is no valid method to assign a dollar value to differing levels of analgesia, the cost of each technique can be compared with the analgesic benefit (patient pain scores) of each technique.
METHODS: The authors created a cost model for epidural and intravenous analgesia by reviewing the literature to determine the rates of associated clinical outcomes (benefit of each technique to produce analgesia) and complications (e.g., postdural puncture headache). The authors then analyzed data from their institution's cost-accounting system to determine the hospital cost for parturients admitted for delivery, estimated the cost of each complication, and performed a sensitivity analysis to evaluate the cost impact of changing key variables. A secondary analysis was performed assuming that the cost of nursing was fixed (did not change depending on the number of nursing interventions).
RESULTS: If the cesarean section rate equals 20% for both intravenous and epidural analgesia, the additional expected cost per patient to society of epidural analgesia of labor pain ranges from $259 (assuming nursing costs in the labor and delivery suite do not vary with the number of nursing interventions) to $338 (assuming nursing costs do increase as the number of interventions increases) relative to the expected cost of intravenous analgesia for labor pain. This cost difference results from increased professional costs and complication costs associated with epidural analgesia.
CONCLUSIONS: Epidural analgesia is more costly than intravenous analgesia. How the cost of the anesthesiologist and nursing care is calculated affects how much more costly epidural analgesia is relative to intravenous analgesia. Published studies have determined that epidural analgesia provides relief of labor pain superior to intravenous analgesia, quantified in one study as 40 mm better on a 100-mm scale during the first stage of labor and 29 mm better during the second stage of labor. Patients, physicians, and society need to weigh the value of improved pain relief from epidural analgesia versus the increased cost of epidural analgesia.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10719963     DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200003000-00028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesthesiology        ISSN: 0003-3022            Impact factor:   7.892


  5 in total

1.  Transcranial Doppler role in prediction of post-dural puncture headache in parturients undergoing elective cesarean section: prospective observational study.

Authors:  Sherif M S Mowafy; Shereen E Abd Ellatif
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2019-05-09       Impact factor: 2.078

Review 2.  Economic considerations related to providing adequate pain relief for women in labour: comparison of epidural and intravenous analgesia.

Authors:  Cecil Huang; Alex Macario
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Effectiveness and safety of moderate-intensity aerobic water exercise during pregnancy for reducing use of epidural analgesia during labor: protocol for a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Araceli Navas; Catalina Artigues; Alfonso Leiva; Elena Portells; Aina Soler; Antonia Cladera; Silvia Ortas; Margarita Alomar; Marina Gual; Concepción Manzanares; Marina Brunet; Magdalena Julià; Lidia López; Lorena Granda; Miquel Bennasar-Veny; Mari Carmen Carrascosa
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2018-04-11       Impact factor: 3.007

4.  An economic analysis of patient controlled remifentanil and epidural analgesia as pain relief in labour (RAVEL trial); a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Liv Freeman; Johanna Middeldorp; Eline van den Akker; Martijn Oudijk; Caroline Bax; Marloes van Huizen; Celine Radder; Bianca Fong; Kitty Bloemenkamp; Albert Dahan; Michel Struys; Ben Willem Mol; Jan van Lith; Elske van den Akker-van Marle
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Regional versus systemic analgesia in video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Benedikt Haager; Daniel Schmid; Joerg Eschbach; Bernward Passlick; Torsten Loop
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2019-10-17       Impact factor: 2.217

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.