Literature DB >> 8649701

Management of the presumed susceptible varicella (chickenpox)-exposed gravida: a cost-effectiveness/cost-benefit analysis.

D J Rouse1, M Gardner, S J Allen, R L Goldenberg.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of different strategies for managing the presumed susceptible varicella (chickenpox)-exposed gravida.
METHODS: Three strategies were evaluated: 1) a do-nothing or observation strategy; 2) a testing strategy, in which immune status was assessed and varicella-zoster immune globulin was administered to those who tested nonimmune; and 3) a universal-administration strategy, in which varicella-zoster immune globulin was given to all exposed, presumed susceptible gravidas. Because precise data are unavailable about varicella mortality and hospitalization rates in pregnancy, a range of potential rates was evaluated, from one to greater than 20 times healthy nonpregnant adult rates. The potential efficacy of varicella-zoster immune globulin varied from 1 to 99%. A strategy was defined as cost-effective if it cost less than $50,000 per life-year gained.
RESULTS: If the mortality rate from varicella infection in pregnancy was increased fivefold over the nonpregnant healthy adult rate (ie, from 31/100,000 to 155/100,000 cases), efficacy would have to be at least 49% for the immune-testing strategy to be cost-effective. If pregnancy only doubled the varicella mortality rate, then even with perfect efficacy, the immune-testing strategy would not be cost-effective. Under most assumptions, the universal-administration strategy was cost-ineffective when compared with the immune-testing strategy. Similar results were obtained in the parallel cost-benefit analysis, which considered hospitalization costs and rates. The analysis was sensitive to the varicella transmission rate and the discount rate.
CONCLUSION: From a cost-effectiveness/cost-benefit standpoint, management based on immune testing is preferable to universal varicella-zoster immune globulin administration when caring for the varicella-exposed gravida with a negative or indeterminate infection history.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8649701     DOI: 10.1016/0029-7844(96)00025-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  7 in total

1.  Varicella vaccine in pregnancy.

Authors:  D S Seidman; D K Stevenson; A M Arvin
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-09-21

Review 2.  Economic evaluations of varicella vaccination programmes: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Nancy Thiry; Philippe Beutels; Pierre Van Damme; Eddy Van Doorslaer
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  Congenital varicella syndrome: the evidence for secondary prevention with varicella-zoster immune globulin.

Authors:  Arlan Cohen; Panagis Moschopoulos; Panagis Maschopoulos; Richard E Stiehm; Gideon Koren
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2011-01-24       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 4.  Perinatal cytomegalovirus and varicella zoster virus infections: epidemiology, prevention, and treatment.

Authors:  Kristy M Bialas; Geeta K Swamy; Sallie R Permar
Journal:  Clin Perinatol       Date:  2014-11-28       Impact factor: 3.430

5.  Chicken pox in pregnancy : an obstetric concern.

Authors:  Viroj Wiwanitkit
Journal:  Indian J Dermatol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 1.494

6.  A 34-year-old Pregnant Woman with Chickenpox Re-infection.

Authors:  Somayeh Karimi; Sepideh Babaniamansour; Ehsan Aliniagerdroudbari
Journal:  Adv J Emerg Med       Date:  2019-05-25

Review 7.  Implementation of Hospital Policy for Healthcare Workers and Patients Exposed to Varicella-Zoster Virus.

Authors:  Si-Hyun Kim; Sun Hee Park; Su-Mi Choi; Dong-Gun Lee
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2018-08-27       Impact factor: 2.153

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.