Obstructed Labor and Caesarean Delivery: The Cost and Benefit of Surgical Intervention

Background: Although advances in the reduction of maternal mortality have been made, up to 273,000 women will die this year from obstetric etiologies. Obstructed labor (OL), most commonly treated with Caesarean delivery, has been identified as a major contributor to global maternal morbidity and mortality. We used economic and epidemiological modeling to estimate the cost per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted and benefit-cost ratio of treating OL with Caesarean delivery for 49 countries identified as providing an insufficient number of Caesarean deliveries to meet demand. Methods and Findings Using publicly available data and explicit economic assumptions, we estimated that the cost per DALY (3,0,0) averted for providing Caesarean delivery for OL ranged widely, from $251 per DALY averted in Madagascar to$3,462 in Oman. The median cost per DALY averted was $304. Benefit-cost ratios also varied, from 0.6 in Zimbabwe to 69.9 in Gabon. The median benefit-cost ratio calculated was 6.0. The main limitation of this study is an assumption that lack of surgical capacity is the main factor responsible for DALYs from OL. Conclusions: Using the World Health Organization's cost-effectiveness standards, investing in Caesarean delivery can be considered “highly cost-effective” for 48 of the 49 countries included in this study. Furthermore, in 46 of the 49 included countries, the benefit-cost ratio was greater than 1.0, implying that investment in Caesarean delivery is a viable economic proposition. While Caesarean delivery alone is not sufficient for combating OL, it is necessary, cost-effective by WHO standards, and ultimately economically favorable in the vast majority of countries included in this study

Using value of statistical life for the ex ante evaluation of transport policy options: a discussion based on ethical theory

This paper aims to discuss a number of questions that are highly important for the ex ante evaluation of the safety impacts of transport policy options, from the perspective of ethical theory: (1) Is it morally OK to express prevention on acceptance of fatalities or risks in monetary terms? (2) How useful is the concept of the value of a statistical life (VOSL) for ex ante evaluations of transport policy options? (3) What are the pros and cons of pricing protection of lives or prevention of risks in ex ante evaluations? (4) Which methods are available for expressing (protection of) human lives in monetary terms, and what are the main related methodological discussions? (5) Are all safety-related costs generally included in ex ante evaluations of the safety impacts of transport policy options, and if not: what is the relevance of excluded costs categories from an ethical perspective? (6) How important is the distribution of safety effects from an ethical perspective? The answer to the first question highly depends on the ethical theory that is used. With respect to question 2 we think that the VOSL is a useful concept, but that its application is not straightforward, for several reasons. Thirdly we think that probably pricing safety improves the quality of decision making, but to the best of our knowledge there is no research to underpin this expectation. The answer to question 4 is that several methods exist to estimate the value of a statistical life (VOSL), willingness-to-pay (WTP) methods being the most common category of methods. However, several methodological issues arise that make estimates of VOSL less straightforward. With respect to question 5 we conclude that behaviour-related avoidance costs are often overlooked and that these costs are relevant from an ethical perspective because the freedom to move and the freedom to participate in activities are challenged. Finally the answer to question 6 is that from an ethical perspective, in terms of the evaluation of policy measures, it might matter which groups of the population are the victims of the transport system, or are at risk. Egalitarian theories as well as sufficientarianism are useful theories to discuss distribution effects. Different theories conclude differently. © 2012 The Author(s)

Ancillary human health benefits of improved air quality resulting from climate change mitigation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation policies can provide ancillary benefits in terms of short-term improvements in air quality and associated health benefits. Several studies have analyzed the ancillary impacts of GHG policies for a variety of locations, pollutants, and policies. In this paper we review the existing evidence on ancillary health benefits relating to air pollution from various GHG strategies and provide a framework for such analysis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We evaluate techniques used in different stages of such research for estimation of: (1) changes in air pollutant concentrations; (2) avoided adverse health endpoints; and (3) economic valuation of health consequences. The limitations and merits of various methods are examined. Finally, we conclude with recommendations for ancillary benefits analysis and related research gaps in the relevant disciplines.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found that to date most assessments have focused their analysis more heavily on one aspect of the framework (e.g., economic analysis). While a wide range of methods was applied to various policies and regions, results from multiple studies provide strong evidence that the short-term public health and economic benefits of ancillary benefits related to GHG mitigation strategies are substantial. Further, results of these analyses are likely to be underestimates because there are a number of important unquantified health and economic endpoints.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Remaining challenges include integrating the understanding of the relative toxicity of particulate matter by components or sources, developing better estimates of public health and environmental impacts on selected sub-populations, and devising new methods for evaluating heretofore unquantified and non-monetized benefits.</p

Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccination during Pregnancy and Effects in Infants.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the dominant cause of severe lower respiratory tract infection in infants, with the most severe cases concentrated among younger infants. METHODS: Healthy pregnant women, at 28 weeks 0 days through 36 weeks 0 days of gestation, with an expected delivery date near the start of the RSV season, were randomly assigned in an overall ratio of approximately 2:1 to receive a single intramuscular dose of RSV fusion (F) protein nanoparticle vaccine or placebo. Infants were followed for 180 days to assess outcomes related to lower respiratory tract infection and for 364 days to assess safety. The primary end point was RSV-associated, medically significant lower respiratory tract infection up to 90 days of life, and the primary analysis of vaccine efficacy against the primary end point was performed in the per-protocol population of infants (prespecified criterion for success, lower bound of the 97.52% confidence interval [CI] of ≥30%). RESULTS: A total of 4636 women underwent randomization, and there were 4579 live births. During the first 90 days of life, the percentage of infants with RSV-associated, medically significant lower respiratory tract infection was 1.5% in the vaccine group and 2.4% in the placebo group (vaccine efficacy, 39.4%; 97.52% CI, -1.0 to 63.7; 95% CI, 5.3 to 61.2). The corresponding percentages for RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection with severe hypoxemia were 0.5% and 1.0% (vaccine efficacy, 48.3%; 95% CI, -8.2 to 75.3), and the percentages for hospitalization for RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection were 2.1% and 3.7% (vaccine efficacy, 44.4%; 95% CI, 19.6 to 61.5). Local injection-site reactions among the women were more common with vaccine than with placebo (40.7% vs. 9.9%), but the percentages of participants who had other adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: RSV F protein nanoparticle vaccination in pregnant women did not meet the prespecified success criterion for efficacy against RSV-associated, medically significant lower respiratory tract infection in infants up to 90 days of life. The suggestion of a possible benefit with respect to other end-point events involving RSV-associated respiratory disease in infants warrants further study. (Funded by Novavax and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02624947.)