Literature DB >> 1903593

Cost-effectiveness of prenatal testing for Chlamydia trachomatis.

M D Nettleman1, T A Bell.   

Abstract

We investigated the cost-effectiveness of strategies for screening pregnant women for Chlamydia trachomatis. Screening was not cost-effective unless certain conditions were met. Direct antigen testing of all pregnant women would be cost-effective if the test cost less than $6.30 or the prevalence of infection exceeded 6%. However, the positive predictive value of the test was only 51%. Culturing was not cost-effective until the prevalence of infection exceeded 14.8%. If a direct antigen test cost less than $3.90 or prevalence exceeded 8.7%, direct antigen testing of all women and using culture to confirm positive direct antigen tests would be cost-effective. If a direct antigen test cost $8.00 and culture cost $25.00, the excess cost of performing a direct antigen test in all women and confirming positive results with culture would be $2.09 per pregnant woman. Screening all pregnant women for chlamydia is not cost-effective, but the excess cost is modest when direct antigen tests are used.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1903593     DOI: 10.1016/0002-9378(91)90701-r

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  8 in total

Review 1.  Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: a systematic review of the economic evaluations and modelling.

Authors:  T E Roberts; S Robinson; P Barton; S Bryan; N Low
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.519

Review 2.  Drug therapies for sexually transmitted diseases. Clinical and economic considerations.

Authors:  W R Bowie
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 9.546

3.  Prevalence of chlamydial antibody in pregnancy. A matched-pair study.

Authors:  P Olliaro; A Regazzetti; A L Marchetti; P Lanzarini; A Spinillo; G Gorini
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 8.082

Review 4.  Chlamydia trachomatis in adolescents and adults. Clinical and economic implications.

Authors:  C A Marra; D M Patrick; R Reynolds; F Marra
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 5.  Azithromycin. A pharmacoeconomic review of its use as a single-dose regimen in the treatment of uncomplicated urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women.

Authors:  A P Lea; H M Lamb
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Periodic health examination, 1996 update: 2. Screening for chlamydial infections. Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination.

Authors:  H D Davies; E E Wang
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1996-06-01       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  Cost-benefit analysis of Chlamydia trachomatis screening in pregnant women in a high burden setting in the United States.

Authors:  Jared Ditkowsky; Khushal H Shah; Margaret R Hammerschlag; Stephan Kohlhoff; Tamar A Smith-Norowitz
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2017-02-18       Impact factor: 3.090

8.  Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in low-risk obstetric patients.

Authors:  R K Gribble; J M Ricci-Goodman; R L Berg
Journal:  Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1994
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.