Literature DB >> 15534340

A cost-utility analysis of neonatal circumcision.

Robert S Van Howe1.   

Abstract

A cost-utility analysis, based on published data from multiple observational studies, comparing boys circumcised at birth and those not circumcised was undertaken using the Quality of Well-being Scale, a Markov analysis, the standard reference case, and a societal perspective. Neonatal circumcision increased incremental costs by $828.42 per patient and resulted in an incremental 15.30 well-years lost per 1000 males. If neonatal circumcision was cost-free, pain-free, and had no immediate complications, it was still more costly than not circumcising. Using sensitivity analysis, it was impossible to arrange a scenario that made neonatal circumcision cost-effective. Neonatal circumcision is not good health policy, and support for it as a medical procedure cannot be justified financially or medically.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15534340     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X04271039

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  11 in total

1.  Edgar Schoen does not represent the North American view of male circumcision.

Authors:  G Hill; J V Geisheker
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.791

Review 2.  Cost-effectiveness of neonatal surgery: first greeted with scepticism, now increasingly accepted.

Authors:  Marten J Poley; Werner B F Brouwer; Jan J V Busschbach; Frans W J Hazebroek; Dick Tibboel; Frans F H Rutten; Jan C Molenaar
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2007-11-06       Impact factor: 1.827

3.  Routine circumcision: the opposing view.

Authors:  Andrew E Macneily
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Medicaid coverage of circumcision spreads harm to the poor.

Authors:  Lawrence W Green; Ryan G McAllister; Kent W Peterson; John W Travis
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2009-01-15       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Libertarianism and circumcision.

Authors:  Patrick Testa; Walter E Block
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2014-05-26

6.  Canadian Urological Association guideline on the care of the normal foreskin and neonatal circumcision in Canadian infants (full version).

Authors:  Sumit Dave; Kourosh Afshar; Luis H Braga; Peter Anderson
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 7.  The economic burden of noncervical human papillomavirus disease in the United States.

Authors:  Delphine Hu; Sue Goldie
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 8.  Economic evaluations of adult male circumcision for prevention of heterosexual acquisition of HIV in men in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review.

Authors:  Olalekan A Uthman; Taiwo Aderemi Popoola; Mubashir M B Uthman; Olatunde Aremu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-03-10       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  Can routine neonatal circumcision help prevent human immunodeficiency virus transmission in the United States?

Authors:  Xiao Xu; Divya A Patel; Vanessa K Dalton; Mark D Pearlman; Timothy R B Johnson
Journal:  Am J Mens Health       Date:  2009-03

10.  Cost-effectiveness of newborn circumcision in reducing lifetime HIV risk among U.S. males.

Authors:  Stephanie L Sansom; Vimalanand S Prabhu; Angela B Hutchinson; Qian An; H Irene Hall; Ram K Shrestha; Arielle Lasry; Allan W Taylor
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-01-18       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.