BMC pediatrics · 2020
Cost effectiveness of a novel device for improving resuscitation of apneic newborns.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Ali Ayman, Nudel Jacob, Heberle Curtis R, Santorino Data, Olson Kristian R, Hur Chin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Intrapartum-related hypoxic events are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in low resource countries. Neonates who receive proper resuscitation may go on to live otherwise healthy lives. However, even when a birth attendant is present, these babies frequently receive suboptimal ventilation with poor outcomes. The Augmented Infant Resuscitator (AIR) is a low-cost, reusable device designed to provide birth attendants real-time objective feedback on measures of ventilation quality during resuscitations and is intended for use in training and at the point of care. The goal of our study was to determine the impact and cost-effectiveness of AIR deployment in conjunction with existing resuscitation training programs in low resource settings.
METHODS: We developed a simulation model of the natural history of intrapartum-related neonatal hypoxia and resuscitation deriving parameters from published literature and model calibration. Simulations estimated the number of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted with use of the AIR by birth attendants if deployed at the point of care. Potential decreases in neonatal mortality and long-term subsequent morbidity from disability were modeled over a lifetime horizon. The primary outcome for the analysis was the cost per DALY averted. Model parameters were specific to the Mbeya region of Tanzania.
RESULTS: Implementation of the AIR strategy resulted in an additional cost of $24.44 (4.80, 73.62) per DALY averted on top of the cost of existing, validated resuscitation programs. Per hospital, this adds an extra $656 to initial training costs and averts approximately 26.84 years of disability in the cohort of children born in the first year, when projected over a lifetime. The findings were robust to sensitivity analyses. Total roll-out costs for AIR are estimated at $422,688 for the Mbeya region, averting approximately 9018 DALYs on top of existing resuscitation programs, which are estimated to cost $202,240 without AIR.
CONCLUSION: Our modeling analysis finds that use of the AIR device may be both an effective and cost-effective tool when used as a supplement to existing resuscitation training programs. Implementation of this strategy in multiple settings will provide data to improve our model parameters and potentially confirm our findings.
METHODS: We developed a simulation model of the natural history of intrapartum-related neonatal hypoxia and resuscitation deriving parameters from published literature and model calibration. Simulations estimated the number of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted with use of the AIR by birth attendants if deployed at the point of care. Potential decreases in neonatal mortality and long-term subsequent morbidity from disability were modeled over a lifetime horizon. The primary outcome for the analysis was the cost per DALY averted. Model parameters were specific to the Mbeya region of Tanzania.
RESULTS: Implementation of the AIR strategy resulted in an additional cost of $24.44 (4.80, 73.62) per DALY averted on top of the cost of existing, validated resuscitation programs. Per hospital, this adds an extra $656 to initial training costs and averts approximately 26.84 years of disability in the cohort of children born in the first year, when projected over a lifetime. The findings were robust to sensitivity analyses. Total roll-out costs for AIR are estimated at $422,688 for the Mbeya region, averting approximately 9018 DALYs on top of existing resuscitation programs, which are estimated to cost $202,240 without AIR.
CONCLUSION: Our modeling analysis finds that use of the AIR device may be both an effective and cost-effective tool when used as a supplement to existing resuscitation training programs. Implementation of this strategy in multiple settings will provide data to improve our model parameters and potentially confirm our findings.