American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2010
The cost-effectiveness of prenatal screening for spinal muscular atrophy.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Little Sarah E, Janakiraman Vanitha, Kaimal Anjali, Musci Thomas, Ecker Jeffrey, Caughey Aaron B
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate the cost-effectiveness of prenatal screening for spinal muscular atrophy (SMA).
STUDY DESIGN: A decision analytic model was created to compare a policy of universal SMA screening to that of no screening. The primary outcome was incremental cost per maternal quality-adjusted life year. Probabilities, costs, and outcomes were estimated through literature review. Univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of our model to changes in baseline assumptions.
RESULTS: Universal screening for SMA is not cost-effective at $4.9 million per quality-adjusted life year. In all, 12,500 women need to be screened to prevent 1 case of SMA, at a cost of $5.0 million per case averted. Our results were most sensitive to the baseline prevalence of disease.
CONCLUSION: Universal prenatal screening for SMA is not cost-effective. For populations at high risk, such as those with a family history, SMA testing may be a cost-effective strategy.
STUDY DESIGN: A decision analytic model was created to compare a policy of universal SMA screening to that of no screening. The primary outcome was incremental cost per maternal quality-adjusted life year. Probabilities, costs, and outcomes were estimated through literature review. Univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of our model to changes in baseline assumptions.
RESULTS: Universal screening for SMA is not cost-effective at $4.9 million per quality-adjusted life year. In all, 12,500 women need to be screened to prevent 1 case of SMA, at a cost of $5.0 million per case averted. Our results were most sensitive to the baseline prevalence of disease.
CONCLUSION: Universal prenatal screening for SMA is not cost-effective. For populations at high risk, such as those with a family history, SMA testing may be a cost-effective strategy.