Gynecologic and obstetric investigation · 2011
Medical versus surgical abortion methods for pregnancy in China: a cost-minimization analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Xia Wei, She Shouzhang, Lam Tai Hing
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Both medical and surgical abortions are popular in developing countries. However, the monetary costs of these two methods have not been compared.
METHODS: 430 women seeking abortions were recruited in 2008. Either a medical or surgical method was used for the abortion. We adopted the perspective of a third-party payer. Cost-minimization analysis was used based on all charges for the overall procedures in an out-patient clinic in Guangzhou, China.
RESULTS: 219 subjects (51%) chose a medical method (mifepristone and misoprostol), whereas 211 subjects (49%) chose a surgical method. The efficacy in the surgical group was significantly higher than in the medical group (100 vs. 90%, p < 0.001). Surgical abortion incurred much more costs than medical abortion on average after initial treatment. When the subsequent costs were accumulated within the 2-week follow-up, the mean total cost in the medical group increased significantly due to failure of abortion and persistent bleeding. Patients undergoing medical abortion eventually incurred equivalent expenses compared to patients undergoing surgical abortion (p = 0.42).
CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the mean final costs between the two abortion methods. Complications of persistent bleeding and failure to abort (requiring surgical intervention) in the medical treatment group increased the final mean total cost substantially.
METHODS: 430 women seeking abortions were recruited in 2008. Either a medical or surgical method was used for the abortion. We adopted the perspective of a third-party payer. Cost-minimization analysis was used based on all charges for the overall procedures in an out-patient clinic in Guangzhou, China.
RESULTS: 219 subjects (51%) chose a medical method (mifepristone and misoprostol), whereas 211 subjects (49%) chose a surgical method. The efficacy in the surgical group was significantly higher than in the medical group (100 vs. 90%, p < 0.001). Surgical abortion incurred much more costs than medical abortion on average after initial treatment. When the subsequent costs were accumulated within the 2-week follow-up, the mean total cost in the medical group increased significantly due to failure of abortion and persistent bleeding. Patients undergoing medical abortion eventually incurred equivalent expenses compared to patients undergoing surgical abortion (p = 0.42).
CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the mean final costs between the two abortion methods. Complications of persistent bleeding and failure to abort (requiring surgical intervention) in the medical treatment group increased the final mean total cost substantially.