Beth A Plunkett1, William A Grobman. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether routine hepatitis C virus screening in pregnancy is cost-effective. STUDY DESIGN: A decision tree with Markov analysis was developed to compare 3 approaches to asymptomatic hepatitis C virus infection in low-risk pregnant women: (1) no hepatitis C virus screening, (2) hepatitis C virus screening and subsequent treatment for progressive disease, and (3) hepatitis C virus screening, subsequent treatment for progressive disease, and elective cesarean delivery to avert perinatal transmission. Lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years were evaluated for mother and child. RESULTS: In our base case, hepatitis C virus screening and subsequent treatment of progressive disease was dominated (more costly and less effective) by no screening, with an incremental cost of 108 US dollars and a decreased incremental effectiveness of 0.00011 quality-adjusted life years. When compared with no screening, the marginal cost and effectiveness of screening, treatment, and cesarean delivery was 117 US dollars and 0.00010 quality-adjusted life years, respectively, which yields a cost-effectiveness ratio of 1,170,000 US dollars per quality-adjusted life year. CONCLUSION: The screening of asymptomatic pregnant women for hepatitis C virus infection is not cost-effective.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether routine hepatitis C virus screening in pregnancy is cost-effective. STUDY DESIGN: A decision tree with Markov analysis was developed to compare 3 approaches to asymptomatic hepatitis C virus infection in low-risk pregnant women: (1) no hepatitis C virus screening, (2) hepatitis C virus screening and subsequent treatment for progressive disease, and (3) hepatitis C virus screening, subsequent treatment for progressive disease, and elective cesarean delivery to avert perinatal transmission. Lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years were evaluated for mother and child. RESULTS: In our base case, hepatitis C virus screening and subsequent treatment of progressive disease was dominated (more costly and less effective) by no screening, with an incremental cost of 108 US dollars and a decreased incremental effectiveness of 0.00011 quality-adjusted life years. When compared with no screening, the marginal cost and effectiveness of screening, treatment, and cesarean delivery was 117 US dollars and 0.00010 quality-adjusted life years, respectively, which yields a cost-effectiveness ratio of 1,170,000 US dollars per quality-adjusted life year. CONCLUSION: The screening of asymptomatic pregnant women for hepatitis C virus infection is not cost-effective.
Authors: David D Kim; David W Hutton; Ahmed A Raouf; Mohsen Salama; Ahmed Hablas; Ibrahim A Seifeldin; Amr S Soliman Journal: Glob Public Health Date: 2014-12-03
Authors: Steven A Pergam; Chia C Wang; Carolyn M Gardella; Taylor G Sandison; Warren T Phipps; Stephen E Hawes Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2008-05-19 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Anouk T Urbanus; Marjolijn van Keep; Amy A Matser; Mark H Rozenbaum; Christine J Weegink; Anneke van den Hoek; Maria Prins; Maarten J Postma Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-08-12 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Susan J M Hahné; Irene K Veldhuijzen; Lucas Wiessing; Tek-Ang Lim; Mika Salminen; Marita van de Laar Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2013-04-18 Impact factor: 3.090