OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to determine the cost-saving potential of a simple screen-and-treat program for vaginal infection, which has previously been shown to lead to a reduction of 50% in the rate of preterm births. STUDY DESIGN: To determine the potential cost savings, we compared the direct costs of preterm delivery of infants with a birth weight below 1900g with the costs of the screen-and-treat program. We used a cut-off birth weight of 1900g because, in our population, all infants with a birth weight below 1900g were transferred to the neonatal intensive care unit. The direct costs associated with preterm delivery were defined to include the costs of the initial hospitalization of both mother and infant and the costs of outpatient follow-up throughout the first 6 years of life of the former preterm infant. The costs of the screen-and-treat program were defined to include the costs of the screening examination and the resulting costs of antimicrobial treatment and follow-up. All calculations were based on health-economic data obtained in the metropolitan area of Vienna, Austria. RESULTS: The number of preterm infants with a birth weight below 1900g was 12 (0.5%) in the intervention group (N=2058) and 29 (1.3%) in the control group (N=2097). The direct costs per preterm birth were found to amount to EUR (euro) 60262. Overall, the expected total savings in direct costs achieved by the screen-and-treat program and the ensuing 50% reduction in the number preterm births with a birth weight below 1900g amounted to more than euro 11 million. The costs of screening and treatment were found to amount to merely 7% of the direct costs saved as a result of the screen-and-treat program. CONCLUSION: A simple preterm prevention program, consisting of screening and antimicrobial treatment and follow-up of women with asymptomatic vaginal infection, leads not only to a significant reduction in the rate of preterm births but also to substantial savings in the direct costs associated with prematurity.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to determine the cost-saving potential of a simple screen-and-treat program for vaginal infection, which has previously been shown to lead to a reduction of 50% in the rate of preterm births. STUDY DESIGN: To determine the potential cost savings, we compared the direct costs of preterm delivery of infants with a birth weight below 1900g with the costs of the screen-and-treat program. We used a cut-off birth weight of 1900g because, in our population, all infants with a birth weight below 1900g were transferred to the neonatal intensive care unit. The direct costs associated with preterm delivery were defined to include the costs of the initial hospitalization of both mother and infant and the costs of outpatient follow-up throughout the first 6 years of life of the former preterm infant. The costs of the screen-and-treat program were defined to include the costs of the screening examination and the resulting costs of antimicrobial treatment and follow-up. All calculations were based on health-economic data obtained in the metropolitan area of Vienna, Austria. RESULTS: The number of preterm infants with a birth weight below 1900g was 12 (0.5%) in the intervention group (N=2058) and 29 (1.3%) in the control group (N=2097). The direct costs per preterm birth were found to amount to EUR (euro) 60262. Overall, the expected total savings in direct costs achieved by the screen-and-treat program and the ensuing 50% reduction in the number preterm births with a birth weight below 1900g amounted to more than euro 11 million. The costs of screening and treatment were found to amount to merely 7% of the direct costs saved as a result of the screen-and-treat program. CONCLUSION: A simple preterm prevention program, consisting of screening and antimicrobial treatment and follow-up of women with asymptomatic vaginal infection, leads not only to a significant reduction in the rate of preterm births but also to substantial savings in the direct costs associated with prematurity.
Authors: Leonie Toboso Silgo; Sara Cruz-Melguizo; María Luisa de la Cruz Conty; María Begoña Encinas Pardilla; María Muñoz Algarra; Yolanda Nieto Jiménez; Alexandra Arranz Friediger; Óscar Martínez-Pérez Journal: Pathogens Date: 2021-12-10