Cora Peterson1, Scott D Grosse2, Jill Glidewell2, Lorraine F Garg3, Kim Van Naarden Braun4, Mary M Knapp3, Leslie M Beres3, Cynthia F Hinton2, Richard S Olney2, Cynthia H Cassell2. 1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Atlanta, GA ; Current affiliation: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Injury Prevention and Control, Atlanta, GA. 2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Atlanta, GA. 3. New Jersey Department of Health, Division of Family Health Services, Special Child Health and Early Intervention Services, Trenton, NJ. 4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Atlanta, GA ; New Jersey Department of Health, Division of Family Health Services, Special Child Health and Early Intervention Services, Trenton, NJ.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Critical congenital heart disease (CCHD) was recently added to the U.S. Recommended Uniform Screening Panel for newborns. This evaluation aimed to estimate screening time and hospital cost per newborn screened for CCHD using pulse oximetry as part of a public health economic assessment of CCHD screening. METHODS: A cost survey and time and motion study were conducted in well-newborn and special/intensive care nurseries in a random sample of seven birthing hospitals in New Jersey, where the state legislature mandated CCHD screening in 2011. The sample was stratified by hospital facility level, hospital birth census, and geographic location. At the time of the evaluation, all hospitals had conducted CCHD screening for at least four months. RESULTS: Mean screening time per newborn was 9.1 (standard deviation = 3.4) minutes. Hospitals' total mean estimated cost per newborn screened was $14.19 (in 2011 U.S. dollars), consisting of $7.36 in labor costs and $6.83 in equipment and supply costs. CONCLUSIONS: This federal agency-state health department collaborative assessment is the first state-level analysis of time and hospital costs for CCHD screening using pulse oximetry conducted in the U.S. Hospitals' cost per newborn screened for CCHD with pulse oximetry is comparable with cost estimates of existing newborn screening tests. Hospitals' equipment costs varied substantially based on the pulse oximetry technology employed, with lower costs among hospitals that used reusable screening sensors. In combination with estimates of screening accuracy, effectiveness, and avoided costs, information from this evaluation suggests that CCHD screening is cost-effective.
OBJECTIVE: Critical congenital heart disease (CCHD) was recently added to the U.S. Recommended Uniform Screening Panel for newborns. This evaluation aimed to estimate screening time and hospital cost per newborn screened for CCHD using pulse oximetry as part of a public health economic assessment of CCHD screening. METHODS: A cost survey and time and motion study were conducted in well-newborn and special/intensive care nurseries in a random sample of seven birthing hospitals in New Jersey, where the state legislature mandated CCHD screening in 2011. The sample was stratified by hospital facility level, hospital birth census, and geographic location. At the time of the evaluation, all hospitals had conducted CCHD screening for at least four months. RESULTS: Mean screening time per newborn was 9.1 (standard deviation = 3.4) minutes. Hospitals' total mean estimated cost per newborn screened was $14.19 (in 2011 U.S. dollars), consisting of $7.36 in labor costs and $6.83 in equipment and supply costs. CONCLUSIONS: This federal agency-state health department collaborative assessment is the first state-level analysis of time and hospital costs for CCHD screening using pulse oximetry conducted in the U.S. Hospitals' cost per newborn screened for CCHD with pulse oximetry is comparable with cost estimates of existing newborn screening tests. Hospitals' equipment costs varied substantially based on the pulse oximetry technology employed, with lower costs among hospitals that used reusable screening sensors. In combination with estimates of screening accuracy, effectiveness, and avoided costs, information from this evaluation suggests that CCHD screening is cost-effective.
Authors: Shakila Thangaratinam; Jane Daniels; Andrew K Ewer; Javier Zamora; Khalid S Khan Journal: Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed Date: 2007-03-07 Impact factor: 5.747
Authors: Michael R Liske; Christopher S Greeley; David J Law; Jonathan D Reich; William R Morrow; H Scott Baldwin; Thomas P Graham; Arnold W Strauss; Ann L Kavanaugh-McHugh; William F Walsh Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Cora Peterson; April Dawson; Scott D Grosse; Tiffany Riehle-Colarusso; Richard S Olney; Jean Paul Tanner; Russell S Kirby; Jane A Correia; Sharon M Watkins; Cynthia H Cassell Journal: Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol Date: 2013-09-02
Authors: Robert I Koppel; Charlotte M Druschel; Tonia Carter; Barry E Goldberg; Prabhu N Mehta; Rohit Talwar; Fredrick Z Bierman Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: William T Mahle; Jane W Newburger; G Paul Matherne; Frank C Smith; Tracey R Hoke; Robert Koppel; Samuel S Gidding; Robert H Beekman; Scott D Grosse Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-07-06 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Ingolf Griebsch; Rachel L Knowles; Jacqueline Brown; Catherine Bull; Christopher Wren; Carol A Dezateux Journal: Int J Technol Assess Health Care Date: 2007 Impact factor: 2.188
Authors: Monica R McClain; John S Hokanson; Regina Grazel; Kim Van Naarden Braun; Lorraine F Garg; Michelle R Morris; Kathleen Moline; Keri Urquhart; Amy Nance; Harper Randall; Marci K Sontag Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2017-06
Authors: Lorraine F Garg; Kim Van Naarden Braun; Mary M Knapp; Terry M Anderson; Robert I Koppel; Daniel Hirsch; Leslie M Beres; Joseph Sweatlock; Richard S Olney; Jill Glidewell; Cynthia F Hinton; Alex R Kemper Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2013-07-15 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Scott D Grosse; Tiffany Riehle-Colarusso; Marcus Gaffney; Craig A Mason; Stuart K Shapira; Marci K Sontag; Kim Van Naarden Braun; John Iskander Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2017-08-25 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Ayman Al-Sulaiman; Altaf A Kondkar; Mohammad Y Saeedi; Amal Saadallah; Ali Al-Odaib; Khaled K Abu-Amero Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-10-12 Impact factor: 3.411