2,331 research outputs found

    Time and travel costs incurred by women attending antenatal tests: A costing study

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: to estimate the costs to women, their friends and family for different antenatal tests in the Down's syndrome (DS) screening pathway. DESIGN: questionnaire-based costing study. SETTING: eight maternity clinics across the UK. PARTICIPANTS: pregnant women (n=574) attending an appointment for DS screening, NIPT or invasive testing between December 2013 and September 2014. MEASUREMENTS: using data collected from the questionnaires we calculated the total costs to women by multiplying the time spent at the hospital and travelling to and from it by the opportunity costs of the women and accompanying person and adding travel and childcare costs. Assumptions about the value of opportunity costs were tested in one-way sensitivity analyses. The main outcome measure was the mean cost to the women and friends/family for each test (DS screening, NIPT, and invasive testing). FINDINGS: mean costs to women and their family/friend were £33.96 per visit, of which £22.47 were time costs, £9.15 were travel costs and £2.34 were childcare costs. Costs were lowest for NIPT (£22), £32 for DS screening (£44 if combined with NIPT), and highest for invasive testing (£60). Sensitivity analysis revealed that variations around the value of leisure time opportunity costs had the largest influence on the results. KEY CONCLUSIONS: there are considerable costs to women, their friends and family when attending different tests in the DS screening pathway. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: when assessing the cost-effectiveness of changes to this pathway, costs to women should be considered

    Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis (NIPD) for single gene disorders: cost analysis of NIPD and invasive testing pathways

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the costs of offering non-invasive prenatal diagnosis (NIPD) for single gene disorders compared to traditional invasive testing to inform NIPD implementation into clinical practice. METHOD: Total costs of diagnosis using NIPD or invasive testing pathways were compared for a representative set of single gene disorders. RESULTS: For autosomal dominant conditions, where NIPD molecular techniques are straightforward, NIPD cost £314 less than invasive testing. NIPD for autosomal recessive and X-linked conditions requires more complicated technical approaches and total costs were more than invasive testing, e.g. NIPD for spinal muscular atrophy was £1090 more than invasive testing. Impact of test uptake on costs was assessed using sickle cell disorder as an example. Anticipated high uptake of NIPD resulted in an incremental cost of NIPD over invasive testing of £48 635 per 100 pregnancies at risk of sickle cell disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Total costs of NIPD are dependent upon the complexity of the testing technique required. Anticipated increased demand for testing may have economic implications for prenatal diagnostic services. Ethical issues requiring further consideration are highlighted including directing resources to NIPD when used for information only and restricting access to safe tests if it is not cost-effective to develop NIPD for rare conditions
    • …
    corecore