Cost and Cost-Effectiveness Assessments of Newborn Screening for Critical Congenital Heart Disease Using Pulse Oximetry: A Review
1
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, 4770 Buford Highway NE, Mail Stop E-87, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA
2
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA
3
Cotsakos College of Business, William Paterson University, Wayne, NJ 07470, USA
4
Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Neonatal Screen. 2017, 3(4), 34; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns3040034
Received: 1 November 2017 / Revised: 11 December 2017 / Accepted: 12 December 2017 / Published: 14 December 2017
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Neonatal Screening for Critical Congenital Heart Defects)
Screening newborns for critical congenital heart disease (CCHD) using pulse oximetry is recommended to allow for the prompt diagnosis and prevention of life-threatening crises. The present review summarizes and critiques six previously published estimates of the costs or cost-effectiveness of CCHD screening from the United Kingdom, United States, and China. Several elements that affect CCHD screening costs were assessed in varying numbers of studies, including screening staff time, instrumentation, and consumables, as well as costs of diagnosis and treatment. A previous US study that used conservative assumptions suggested that CCHD screening is likely to be considered cost-effective from the healthcare sector perspective. Newly available estimates of avoided infant CCHD deaths in several US states that implemented mandatory CCHD screening policies during 2011–2013 suggest a substantially larger reduction in deaths than was projected in the previous US cost-effectiveness analysis. Taking into account these new estimates, we estimate that cost per life-year gained could be as low as USD 12,000. However, that estimate does not take into account future costs of health care and education for surviving children with CCHD nor the costs incurred by health departments to support and monitor CCHD screening policies and programs.
View Full-Text
Keywords:
neonatal screening; critical congenital heart disease; economic evaluation; cost-effectiveness; health policy
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited
- Supplementary File 1:
PDF-Document (PDF, 542 KB)
MDPI and ACS Style
Grosse, S.D.; Peterson, C.; Abouk, R.; Glidewell, J.; Oster, M.E. Cost and Cost-Effectiveness Assessments of Newborn Screening for Critical Congenital Heart Disease Using Pulse Oximetry: A Review. Int. J. Neonatal Screen. 2017, 3, 34.
Show more citation formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
