| Literature DB >> 34407132 |
Beena Nitin Joshi1, Siddesh Sitaram Shetty2, Kusum Venkobrao Moray2, Oshima Sachin3, Himanshu Chaurasia2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Post-partum hemorrhage (PPH) is the leading direct cause of maternal mortality in India. Uterine balloon tamponade (UBT) is recommended for atonic PPH cases not responding to uterotonics. This study assessed cost-effectiveness of three UBT devices used in Indian public health settings.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34407132 PMCID: PMC8372914 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256271
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Decision tree model for atonic PPH management with UBT intervention in Indian public health settings.
A decision is made regarding the choice of UBT device used for eligible women at public healthcare levels in India experiencing atonic PPH. Pathway for scenario with ESM-UBT or Bakri-UBT is the same as depicted for condom-UBT. Circles represent chance nodes. Triangles represent terminal nodes indicating end of the decision tree pathway.
Input parameters used in the model with upper and lower limits.
| Input parameter | Base-case value | Lower limit | Upper limit | Source (Reference) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Median age of onset | 21 | 16.8 | 25.2 | [ |
| Deliveries in Indian public health facility (Includes home deliveries) | 20,785,669 | 16,628,535 | 24,942,803 | [ |
| Probability of all cause maternal mortality in India | 0.00308 | 0.00246 | 0.00369 | Calculated from [ |
| Probability of maternal mortality due to PPH in India | 0.00108 | 0.00086 | 0.00130 | Calculated from [ |
| Proportion of deliveries at primary healthcare level in India | 0.18610 | 0.14888 | 0.22332 | [ |
| Proportion of deliveries at secondary healthcare level in India | 0.32930 | 0.26344 | 0.39516 | [ |
| Proportion of deliveries at tertiary healthcare level in India | 0.48460 | 0.38768 | 0.58152 | [ |
| Incidence of post-partum haemorrhage in India/ | 0.03606 | 0.02885 | 0.04327 | Calculated from [ |
| Annual cohort of women eligible for UBT device insertion after experiencing atonic PPH | 59,962 | 47,970 | 71,955 | Calculated form [ |
|
| ||||
| Proportion of atonic PPH cases controlled after condom-UBT insertion | 0.923 | 0.738 | 0.983 | Estimated from targeted literature review |
| Proportion of atonic PPH cases controlled after Bakri-UBT insertion | 0.843 | 0.674 | 0.983 | Estimated from targeted literature review |
| Proportion of atonic PPH cases controlled after ESM-UBT insertion | 0.953 | 0.762 | 0.983 | Estimated from systematic literature review |
| Proportion of uncontrolled atonic PPH cases undergoing obstetric hysterectomy immediately after UBT insertion | 0.14634 | 0.11707 | 0.17561 | Calculated from [ |
| (Based on patient’s clinical condition, severity of PPH bleeding and health system resources) | ||||
| Proportion of uncontrolled atonic PPH cases undergoing obstetric hysterectomy after devascularization group of surgery | 0.21951 | 0.17561 | 0.26341 | Calculated from [ |
| (Undertaken as a life-saving intervention if bleeding remains uncontrolled despite using conservative surgical procedures) | ||||
| Probability of ICU admission in atonic PPH cases successfully controlled with UBT insertion | 0.025 | 0.020 | 0.030 | [ |
| Probability of ICU admission in atonic PPH cases uncontrolled after UBT insertion | 0.769 | 0.61520 | 0.92280 | [ |
|
| ||||
| Condom-UBT insertion cost at primary healthcare level (Includes device cost of INR 128) | 161 | 97 | 226 | [ |
| Condom-UBT insertion cost at secondary healthcare level (Includes device cost of INR 128) | 341 | 264 | 419 | |
| Condom-UBT insertion cost at tertiary healthcare level (Includes device cost of INR 128) | 419 | 342 | 510 | |
| ESM-UBT insertion cost at primary healthcare level (Includes device cost of INR 397) | 432 | 232 | 639 | |
| ESM-UBT insertion cost at secondary healthcare level (Includes device cost of INR 397) | 567 | 381 | 748 | |
| ESM-UBT insertion cost at tertiary healthcare level (Includes device cost of INR 397) | 671 | 548 | 806 | |
| Bakri-UBT insertion cost at primary healthcare level (Includes device cost of INR 9554) | 9,585 | 4,792 | 14,125 | |
| Bakri-UBT insertion cost at secondary healthcare level (Includes device cost of INR 9554) | 9,746 | 5,676 | 13,855 | |
| Bakri-UBT insertion cost at tertiary healthcare level (Includes device cost of INR 9554) | 9,874 | 7,288 | 12,371 | |
| Devascularization surgery cost at secondary level care after ESM-UBT insertion | 3,671 | 2,393 | 5,095 | |
| Obstetric hysterectomy cost at secondary level care after ESM-UBT insertion | 7,734 | 5114 | 10,494 | |
| Devascularization surgery cost at tertiary level care after ESM-UBT insertion | 3,335 | 2,618 | 4,108 | |
| Obstetric hysterectomy cost at tertiary level care after ESM-UBT insertion | 5,579 | 4,386 | 6,908 | |
| Devascularization surgery cost at secondary level care after Condom-UBT insertion | 4,864 | 3,186 | 6,733 | |
| Obstetric hysterectomy cost at secondary level care after Condom-UBT insertion | 7,788 | 5,025 | 10,849 | |
| Devascularization surgery cost at tertiary level care after Condom-UBT insertion | 3,418 | 2,703 | 4,154 | |
| Obstetric hysterectomy cost at tertiary level care after Condom-UBT insertion | 5,470 | 4,276 | 6,734 | |
| Devascularization surgery cost at secondary level care after Bakri-UBT insertion | 4,954 | 3,302 | 6,701 | |
| Obstetric hysterectomy cost at secondary level care after Bakri-UBT insertion | 7,721 | 5,166 | 10,668 | |
| Devascularization surgery cost at tertiary level care after Bakri-UBT insertion | 3,418 | 2,683 | 4,173 | |
| Obstetric hysterectomy cost at tertiary level care after Bakri-UBT insertion | 5,470 | 4,334 | 6,688 | |
| ICU admission cost at tertiary level care for atonic PPH management | 4,896 | 3,244 | 6,746 | |
| Inpatient admission cost at secondary level care for atonic PPH management | 1,774 | 1,083 | 2,548 | |
| Inpatient admission cost at tertiary level care for atonic PPH management | 1,806 | 1,335 | 2,315 | |
| Health system cost for referral of a patient | 1,001 | 801 | 1,201 | [ |
| Healthcare provider training cost per patient | 375 | 300 | 450 | Estimated using unpublished resources, expert opinion and assumptions |
| Out-of-pocket expenditure for childbirth | 2,755 | 2,204 | 3,306 | [ |
|
| ||||
| Discount rate | 0.030 | 0.000 | 0.050 | [ |
| Disability weight for maternal haemorrhage (Less than 1-liter blood loss) | 0.114 | 0.078 | 0.159 | [ |
| Disability weight for maternal haemorrhage (Greater than 1-liter blood loss) | 0.324 | 0.220 | 0.442 | [ |
| Disability weight for infertility due to PPH (Proxy weight of infertility due to puerperal sepsis) | 0.005 | 0.002 | 0.011 | [ |
PPH-Postpartum Haemorrhage, UBT – Uterine Balloon Tamponade, ESM- Every Second Matters, ICU – Intensive Care Unit, INR – Indian National Rupee
Costs and outcomes with UBT devices for atonic PPH management in Indian public health system.
| Characteristics | Condom-UBT | ESM-UBT | Bakri-UBT |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total societal cost in INR (Range) [USD] | 380,023,259 (278,456,845 - 525,081,934) | 375,629,967 (275,009,630- 547,823,882) | 993,068,492 (587,281,814 - 1,443,326,391) |
| [5,891,833 (4,317,160 – 8,140,960)] | [5,823,720 (4,263,715 – 8,493,394)] | [15,396,411(9,105,144 - 22,377,153)] | |
| Total health system cost in INR (Range) [USD] | 192,277,700 (158,310,666 - 254,701,345) | 187,880,533 (154,864,947 - 277,426,632) | 805,236,204 (467,116,489 - 1,172,706,867) |
| [2,981,050 (2,454,429 - 3,948,858)] | [2,912,876 (2,401,006 - 4,301,188)] | [12,484,282 (7,242,116 - 18,181,502)] | |
| Per patient societal cost in INR (Range) [USD] | 6,338 (4,644 - 8,757) | 6,264 (4,586 - 9,136) | 16,561(9,794 - 24,070) |
| [98 (72 -136)] | [97 (71 - 142)] | [257 (152- 373)] | |
| Per patient health system cost in INR (Range) [USD] | 3,207 (2,640 - 4,248) | 3,133 (2,583 - 4,627) | 13,429 (7,790 - 19,557) |
| [50 (41- 66)] | [49 (40 - 72)] | [208 (121 - 303)] | |
| Discounted DALYs per patient (Range) | 0.2156 | 0.1852 | 0.2966 |
| (0.1497 - 0.50) | (0.1497 - 0.48) | (0.1497 - 0.58) | |
| Total maternal deaths in cohort (Range) | 214 | 214 | 216 |
| (134 - 309) | (134 - 309) | (134 - 309) | |
| Total number of surgeries with UBT (Range) | 4,615 | 2,817 | 9,411 |
| (1,223 - 12,545) | (1,223 - 11,395) | (1,223 - 15,615) | |
| Total number of ICU admissions with UBT (Range) | 4,932 | 3,594 | 8,500 |
| (3249 - 8,426) | (3249 - 7,741) | (3249 - 10,253) |
ESM-Every Second Matters, UBT – Uterine Balloon Tamponade, INR – Indian National Rupee, USD – United
Incremental costs, consequences and cost-effectiveness of UBT intervention in atonic PPH management.
| ESM-UBT versus condom-UBT | Bakri-UBT versus condom-UBT | |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Incremental costs in INR (USD) | -73 | 10,224 |
| DALYs averted | 0.030 | -0.081 |
| Incremental cost per DALY averted in INR (USD) | -2,412 | -126,219 |
|
| ||
| Incremental costs in INR (USD) | -73 | 10,222 |
| DALYs averted | 0.030 | -0.081 |
| Incremental cost per DALY averted in INR (USD) | -2,414 | -126,201 |
Fig 2Tornado diagram showing one-way sensitivity analysis results for ESM-UBT versus condom-UBT comparison.
As clinical effectiveness of condom-UBT increases, ESM-UBT is not cost-effective (ESM-UBT more expensive, less effective) as compared to condom-UBT. As clinical effectiveness of condom-UBT decreases (masked), ESM-UBT is cost-saving (ESM-UBT is less expensive, more effective) as compared to condom-UBT. Similarly, for ESM-UBT clinical effectiveness parameter, as clinical effectiveness of ESM-UBT increases, ESM-UBT is cost-saving (ESM-UBT less expensive, more effective) as compared to condom-UBT. As effectiveness of ESM-UBT decreases, ESM-UBT is not cost-effective (ESM-UBT more expensive, less effective) as compared to condom-UBT.
Fig 3Tornado diagram showing one-way sensitivity analysis results for Bakri-UBT versus condom-UBT comparison.
As clinical effectiveness of Bakri-UBT increases, Bakri-UBT is still not cost-effective (Bakri-UBT is more expensive, more effective) at the willingness to pay threshold of INR 24,211. As effectiveness of Bakri-UBT decreases (masked), Bakri-UBT is not cost-effective (Bakri-UBT is more expensive, less effective) as compared to condom-UBT. Similarly, for condom-UBT clinical effectiveness parameter, as condom-UBT effectiveness increases, Bakri-UBT is not cost-effective (Bakri-UBT is more expensive, less effective) as compared to condom-UBT. As condom-UBT effectiveness decreases, Bakri-UBT is still not cost-effective (Bakri-UBT is more expensive, more effective) at the given WTP threshold.
Fig 4Probabilistic sensitivity analysis results with 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations for ESM-UBT versus condom-UBT comparison.
Fig 5Probabilistic sensitivity analysis results with 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations for Bakri-UBT versus condom-UBT comparison.
Fig 6Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve for ESM-UBT versus condom-UBT comparison.
Fig 7Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve for ESM-UBT versus condom-UBT comparison.