减少早产计划的卫生经济评估:范围界定审查

IF 3.1 Q1 NURSING
{"title":"减少早产计划的卫生经济评估:范围界定审查","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ijnsa.2024.100228","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Preterm birth has lifelong implications, placing a burden on individuals, families, communities and the health system. While several interventions to reduce preterm birth have been economically evaluated, no scoping review has been undertaken.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To conduct a scoping review of economic evaluations of interventions that have reduced preterm birth, identify gaps in the literature and inform future health care providers and researchers on the economic value of preterm birth reduction interventions.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Databases such as PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EBSCO, Medline (OVID), EMBASE, NHS Health Technology Assessment, the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database and grey literature were comprehensively searched for economic evaluations of interventions that reduced preterm birth conducted since 2000. Items included: preterm birth reduction, intervention, method of economic evaluation, time-horizon of analysis, study population, perspective of evaluation, effectiveness, and costs. Review processes were undertaken by two reviewers, and disagreements were resolved by the larger team.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Fifteen publications met the inclusion criteria, including pharmacological interventions (5), telemedicine (1), diagnostic procedures (2), public and community health (2), prenatal care and nutrition (2), father's involvement (1), doula care (1) and a comprehensive maternity service redesign (1). Variations were observed in study design, time-horizon, study population and method of evaluation. Most studies (n = 13) adopted either a healthcare payer, provider, or system perspective. Shorter timehorizons for analysis were adopted in all studies, except one that conducted a lifetime economic evaluation. All included interventions, except one, were found to be costeffective, cost-beneficial or led to cost-savings.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Despite preterm birth placing a high economic burden on health systems and society, we found a dearth of long-term economic evaluations of prevention and reduction initiatives. Future research on preterm birth reduction initiatives should include economic evaluations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34476,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Nursing Studies Advances","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666142X24000559/pdfft?md5=e4ffbef59c6e7a295335188b8b3d3211&pid=1-s2.0-S2666142X24000559-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Health economic evaluations of programs reducing preterm birth: A scoping review\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijnsa.2024.100228\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Preterm birth has lifelong implications, placing a burden on individuals, families, communities and the health system. While several interventions to reduce preterm birth have been economically evaluated, no scoping review has been undertaken.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To conduct a scoping review of economic evaluations of interventions that have reduced preterm birth, identify gaps in the literature and inform future health care providers and researchers on the economic value of preterm birth reduction interventions.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Databases such as PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EBSCO, Medline (OVID), EMBASE, NHS Health Technology Assessment, the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database and grey literature were comprehensively searched for economic evaluations of interventions that reduced preterm birth conducted since 2000. Items included: preterm birth reduction, intervention, method of economic evaluation, time-horizon of analysis, study population, perspective of evaluation, effectiveness, and costs. Review processes were undertaken by two reviewers, and disagreements were resolved by the larger team.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Fifteen publications met the inclusion criteria, including pharmacological interventions (5), telemedicine (1), diagnostic procedures (2), public and community health (2), prenatal care and nutrition (2), father's involvement (1), doula care (1) and a comprehensive maternity service redesign (1). Variations were observed in study design, time-horizon, study population and method of evaluation. Most studies (n = 13) adopted either a healthcare payer, provider, or system perspective. Shorter timehorizons for analysis were adopted in all studies, except one that conducted a lifetime economic evaluation. All included interventions, except one, were found to be costeffective, cost-beneficial or led to cost-savings.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Despite preterm birth placing a high economic burden on health systems and society, we found a dearth of long-term economic evaluations of prevention and reduction initiatives. Future research on preterm birth reduction initiatives should include economic evaluations.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34476,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Nursing Studies Advances\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666142X24000559/pdfft?md5=e4ffbef59c6e7a295335188b8b3d3211&pid=1-s2.0-S2666142X24000559-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Nursing Studies Advances\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666142X24000559\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Nursing Studies Advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666142X24000559","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景早产会影响一生,给个人、家庭、社区和医疗系统带来负担。目的 对减少早产的干预措施的经济评价进行范围界定,找出文献中的不足,并向未来的医疗保健提供者和研究人员介绍减少早产干预措施的经济价值。方法在 PubMed、Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature、EBSCO、Medline (OVID)、EMBASE、NHS Health Technology Assessment、Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry 和 NHS Economic Evaluation Database 等数据库以及灰色文献中全面检索 2000 年以来对减少早产干预措施的经济评估。项目包括:减少早产、干预措施、经济评估方法、分析时间范围、研究人群、评估角度、效果和成本。结果15篇出版物符合纳入标准,包括药物干预(5)、远程医疗(1)、诊断程序(2)、公共和社区卫生(2)、产前护理和营养(2)、父亲参与(1)、朵拉护理(1)和综合产科服务重新设计(1)。在研究设计、时间跨度、研究人群和评估方法方面存在差异。大多数研究(n = 13)采用了医疗支付方、提供方或系统的视角。除一项研究进行了终生经济评估外,其他所有研究都采用了较短的时间跨度进行分析。结论尽管早产给医疗系统和社会带来了沉重的经济负担,但我们发现对预防和减少早产措施进行长期经济评估的研究并不多。未来对减少早产措施的研究应包括经济评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Health economic evaluations of programs reducing preterm birth: A scoping review

Background

Preterm birth has lifelong implications, placing a burden on individuals, families, communities and the health system. While several interventions to reduce preterm birth have been economically evaluated, no scoping review has been undertaken.

Objective

To conduct a scoping review of economic evaluations of interventions that have reduced preterm birth, identify gaps in the literature and inform future health care providers and researchers on the economic value of preterm birth reduction interventions.

Methods

Databases such as PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EBSCO, Medline (OVID), EMBASE, NHS Health Technology Assessment, the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database and grey literature were comprehensively searched for economic evaluations of interventions that reduced preterm birth conducted since 2000. Items included: preterm birth reduction, intervention, method of economic evaluation, time-horizon of analysis, study population, perspective of evaluation, effectiveness, and costs. Review processes were undertaken by two reviewers, and disagreements were resolved by the larger team.

Results

Fifteen publications met the inclusion criteria, including pharmacological interventions (5), telemedicine (1), diagnostic procedures (2), public and community health (2), prenatal care and nutrition (2), father's involvement (1), doula care (1) and a comprehensive maternity service redesign (1). Variations were observed in study design, time-horizon, study population and method of evaluation. Most studies (n = 13) adopted either a healthcare payer, provider, or system perspective. Shorter timehorizons for analysis were adopted in all studies, except one that conducted a lifetime economic evaluation. All included interventions, except one, were found to be costeffective, cost-beneficial or led to cost-savings.

Conclusion

Despite preterm birth placing a high economic burden on health systems and society, we found a dearth of long-term economic evaluations of prevention and reduction initiatives. Future research on preterm birth reduction initiatives should include economic evaluations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
审稿时长
81 days
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信