Valuing maternity care: a comparison of stated preference methods with an application to cost-benefit analysis

This research investigates whether a reconfiguration of maternity services, which collocates consultant- and midwifery-led care, reflects demand and value for money in Ireland. Qualitative and quantitative research is undertaken to investigate demand and an economic evaluation is performed to evaluate the costs and benefits of the different models of care. Qualitative research is undertaken to identify women’s motivations when choosing place of delivery. These data are further used to inform two stated preference techniques: a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and contingent valuation method (CVM). These are employed to identify women’s strengths of preferences for different features of care (DCE) and estimate women’s willingness to pay for maternity care (CVM), which is used to inform a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) on consultant- and midwifery-led care. The qualitative research suggests women do not have a clear preference for consultant or midwifery-led care, but rather a hybrid model of care which closely resembles the Domiciliary Care In and Out of Hospital (DOMINO) scheme. Women’s primary concern during care is safety, meaning women would only utilise midwifery-led care when co-located with consultant-led care. The DCE also finds women’s preferred package of care closely mirrors the DOMINO scheme with 39% of women expected to utilise this service. Consultant- and midwifery-led care would then be utilised by 34% and 27% of women, respectively. The CVM supports this hierarchy of preferences where consultant-led care is consistently valued more than midwifery-led care – women are willing to pay €956.03 for consultant-led care and €808.33 for midwifery-led care. A package of care for a woman availing of consultant- and midwifery-led care is estimated to cost €1,102.72 and €682.49, respectively. The CBA suggests both models of care are cost-beneficial and should be pursued in Ireland. This reconfiguration of maternity services would maximise women’s utility, while fulfilling important objectives of key government policy

Surgical site infection after caesarean section? There is an app for that: results from a feasibility study on costs and benefits

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are one of the most common and, yet, preventable healthcare associated infections. In Ireland, the rate of Caesarean section (CS) is increasing, while postpartum hospital stay is decreasing, adversely affecting SSI among women. There is much need to develop post-discharge surveillance which can effectively monitor, detect, and arrange treatment for affected women. The use of modern technology to survey SSI following discharge from hospital remains unexplored. We report the results of a feasibility study which investigates whether an integrated mobile application (hereafter, app) is more cost-beneficial than a stand-alone app or telephone helpline at surveying SSI following CS. We find women prefer the integrated app (47.5%; n=116/244) over the stand-alone app (8.2%; n=20/244) and telephone helpline (18.0%; 44/244), although there is no significant difference in women's valuation of these services using willingness to pay techniques. The stand-alone app is the only cost-beneficial service due to low labour costs. Future research should employ alternative measures when evaluating the benefits of the health technology. The use of a mobile app as a mechanism for postpartum care could represent a considerable advancement towards technological health care

What women want: exploring pregnant women\u27s preferences for alternative models of maternity care

Depending on obstetric risk, maternity care may be provided in one of two locations at hospital level: a consultant-led unit (CLU) or a midwifery-led unit (MLU). Care in a MLU is sparsely provided in Ireland, comprising as few as two units out of a total 21 maternity units. Given its potential for greater efficiencies of care and cost-savings for the state, there has been an increased interest to expand MLUs in Ireland. Yet, very little is known about women’s preferences for midwifery-led care, and whether they would utilise this service when presented with the choice of delivering in a CLU or MLU. This study seeks to involve women in the future planning of maternity care by investigating their preferences for care and subsequent motivations when choosing place of birth. Qualitative research is undertaken to explore maternal preferences for these different models of care. Women only revealed a preference for the MLU when co-located with a CLU due to its close proximity to medical services. However, the results suggest women do not have a clear preference for either model of care, but rather a hybrid model of care which encompasses features of both consultant- and midwifery-led car

What do women want? Valuing women’s preferences and estimating demand for alternative models of maternity care using a discrete choice experiment

Funding This research was supported by the National Perinatal Epidemiology Centre of Ireland. Acknowledgements We thank the participants of the study for taking the time to share their preferences with us. We also thank Ms. Yvonne Freyne, Cork University Maternity Hospital, and Ms. Rachel Conaty, National Maternity Hospital Dublin, for facilitating the acquisition of patient contact details.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Two Alternative Models of Maternity Care in Ireland

Background: The Irish government has committed to expand midwifery-led care alongside consultant-led care nationally, although very little is known about the potential net benefits of this reconfiguration. Objectives: To formally compare the costs and benefits of the major models of care in Ireland, with a view to informing priority setting using the contingent valuation technique and cost-benefit analysis. Methods: A marginal payment scale willingness-to-pay question was adopted from an ex ante perspective. 450 pregnant women were invited to participate in the study. Cost estimates were collected primarily, describing the average cost of a package of care. Net benefit estimates were calculated over a 1-year cycle using a third-party payer perspective. Results: To avoid midwifery-led care, women were willing to pay €821.13 (95% CI 761.66–1150.41); to avoid consultant-led care, women were willing to pay €795.06 (95% CI 695.51–921.15). The average cost of a package of consultant- and midwifery-led care was €1,762.12 (95% CI 1496.73–2027.51) and €1018.47 (95% CI 916.61–1120.33), respectively. Midwifery-led care ranked as the best use of resources, generating a net benefit of €1491.22 (95% CI 989.35–1991.93), compared with €123.23 (95% CI −376.58 to 621.42) for consultant-led care. Conclusions: While both models of care are cost-beneficial, the decision to provide both alternatives may be constrained by resource issues. If only one alternative can be implemented then midwifery-led care should be undertaken for low-risk women, leaving consultant-led care for high-risk women. However, pursuing one alternative contradicts a key objective of government policy, which seeks to improve maternal choice. Ideally, multiple alternatives should be pursued

Cost-effectiveness of metabolic surgery for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and obesity: a systematic review of economic evaluations.

Aim: To systematically identify and appraise the international literature on the cost-effectiveness of metabolic surgery for the treatment of comorbid type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in electronic databases and grey literature sources up to 20 January 2021. Economic evaluations in a T2D population or a subpopulation with T2D were eligible for inclusion. Screening, data extraction, critical appraisal of methodological quality (Consensus Health Economic Criteria list) and assessment of transferability (International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research questionnaire) were undertaken in duplicate. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was the main outcome. Costs were reported in 2020 Irish Euro. Cost-effectiveness was interpreted using willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds of €20,000 and €45,000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Due to heterogeneity arising from various sources, a narrative synthesis was undertaken. Results: Thirty studies across seventeen jurisdictions met the inclusion criteria; 16 specifically in a T2D population and 14 in a subpopulation with T2D. Overall, metabolic surgery was found to be cost-effective or cost-saving. Where undertaken, the results were robust to sensitivity and scenario analyses. Of the 30 studies included, 15 were considered high quality. Identified limitations included limited long-term follow-up data and uncertainty regarding the utility associated with T2D remission. Conclusion: Published high-quality studies suggest metabolic surgery is a cost-effective or cost-saving intervention. As the prevalence of obesity and obesity-related diseases increases worldwide, significant investment and careful consideration of the resource requirements needed for metabolic surgery programmes will be necessary to ensure that service provision is adequate to meet demand.</p

Disutilities for each delivery pathway and complication.

<p>Source: QWB-SA scale (2008).</p><p>Abbreviations: CPX, symptom complexes; MOB, mobility; PAC, physical activity, SAC, social activity; TOLAC, trial of labour after caesarean; CS, Caesarean section; ERCD, Elective repeat Caesarean delivery.</p

Results of 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations on the cost effectiveness plane for a TOLAC and ERCD.

<p>Results of 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations on the cost effectiveness plane for a TOLAC and ERCD.</p

Decision tree representing all possible consequences arising from the decision to undergo a TOLAC or ERCD.

<p>Decision tree representing all possible consequences arising from the decision to undergo a TOLAC or ERCD.</p