Is It Cost-Effective to Induce Labour Early to Prevent Shoulder Dystocia? Evidence From the Big Baby Trial

IF 4.7 1区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Seyran Naghdi, Stavros Petrou, Martin Underwood, Sanjeev Deshpande, Siobhan Quenby, Lauren Ewington, Jason Gardosi, Hema Mistry
{"title":"Is It Cost-Effective to Induce Labour Early to Prevent Shoulder Dystocia? Evidence From the Big Baby Trial","authors":"Seyran Naghdi,&nbsp;Stavros Petrou,&nbsp;Martin Underwood,&nbsp;Sanjeev Deshpande,&nbsp;Siobhan Quenby,&nbsp;Lauren Ewington,&nbsp;Jason Gardosi,&nbsp;Hema Mistry","doi":"10.1111/1471-0528.18160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>The cost-effectiveness of early induction of labour for suspected large-for-gestational-age foetuses to prevent shoulder dystocia is unknown.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A within-trial economic evaluation of induction at 38 + 0 to 38 + 4 weeks' gestation for suspected large-for-gestational-age foetuses. Resource use and costs were measured to 6 months postpartum. We estimated incremental cost per case of shoulder dystocia prevented and incremental cost per maternal quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. We collected data for planned caesarean sections in a cohort study.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>Mean combined woman and infant costs in the induction arm were £89 (95% confidence interval (CI): −£79, £257) higher than the standard care arm, driven by increased neonatal costs. The incremental cost of preventing one case of shoulder dystocia was £11 879 and the incremental cost per maternal QALY gained was £39 518. The probability of early induction being cost-effective was 0.65 at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per case of shoulder dystocia prevented, but 0.36 at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per maternal QALY gained. The cohort study found the mean cost was £310 (95% CI: £74, £545) higher in the induction arm than in the planned caesarean group.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Interpretation</h3>\n \n <p>Early induction of labour increased neonatal care costs. It is not a cost-effective approach when effects are restricted to maternal QALYs. Planned caesarean section might be cost-saving when compared to early induction, although we did not assess longer-term effects such as an increased risk of repeat caesarean sections. Assessments of long-term effects on the mother and infant should be incorporated into future studies.</p>\n \n <p><b>Trial Registration:</b> ISRCTN18229892</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50729,"journal":{"name":"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","volume":"132 9","pages":"1250-1258"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1471-0528.18160","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1471-0528.18160","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The cost-effectiveness of early induction of labour for suspected large-for-gestational-age foetuses to prevent shoulder dystocia is unknown.

Methods

A within-trial economic evaluation of induction at 38 + 0 to 38 + 4 weeks' gestation for suspected large-for-gestational-age foetuses. Resource use and costs were measured to 6 months postpartum. We estimated incremental cost per case of shoulder dystocia prevented and incremental cost per maternal quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. We collected data for planned caesarean sections in a cohort study.

Findings

Mean combined woman and infant costs in the induction arm were £89 (95% confidence interval (CI): −£79, £257) higher than the standard care arm, driven by increased neonatal costs. The incremental cost of preventing one case of shoulder dystocia was £11 879 and the incremental cost per maternal QALY gained was £39 518. The probability of early induction being cost-effective was 0.65 at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per case of shoulder dystocia prevented, but 0.36 at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per maternal QALY gained. The cohort study found the mean cost was £310 (95% CI: £74, £545) higher in the induction arm than in the planned caesarean group.

Interpretation

Early induction of labour increased neonatal care costs. It is not a cost-effective approach when effects are restricted to maternal QALYs. Planned caesarean section might be cost-saving when compared to early induction, although we did not assess longer-term effects such as an increased risk of repeat caesarean sections. Assessments of long-term effects on the mother and infant should be incorporated into future studies.

Trial Registration: ISRCTN18229892

Abstract Image

早期引产预防肩难产是否划算?大婴儿试验的证据
对疑似大胎龄胎儿早期引产以预防肩难产的成本效益尚不清楚。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
5.20%
发文量
345
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BJOG is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). The Journal publishes original, peer-reviewed work in all areas of obstetrics and gynaecology, including contraception, urogynaecology, fertility, oncology and clinical practice. Its aim is to publish the highest quality medical research in women''s health, worldwide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信