Economic Evaluation of the DiAMOND Randomized Trial: Cost and Outcomes of 2 Decision Aids for Mode of Delivery among Women with a Previous Cesarean Section

Sandra Hollinghurst, Clare Emmett, Tim J. Peters, Helen Watson, Tom Fahey, Deirdre J. Murphy and Alan Montgomery
Additional contact information
Sandra Hollinghurst: Department of Community Based Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom, s.p.hollinghurst@bristol.ac.uk
Clare Emmett: Department of Community Based Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
Tim J. Peters: Department of Community Based Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
Helen Watson: Department of Community Based Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
Tom Fahey: Department of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland
Deirdre J. Murphy: Academic Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Trinity College Dublin, and Coombe Women & Infants University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
Alan Montgomery: Department of Community Based Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom

Medical Decision Making, 2010, vol. 30, issue 4, 453-463

Abstract: Background. Maternal preferences should be considered in decisions about mode of delivery following a previous cesarean, but risks and benefits are unclear. Decision aids can help decision making, although few studies have assessed costs in conjunction with effectiveness. Objective. Economic evaluation of 2 decision aids for women with 1 previous cesarean. Design. Cost-consequences analysis. Materials and Methods. Data sources were self-reported resource use and outcome and published national unit costs. The target population was women with 1 previous cesarean. The time horizon was 37 weeks’ gestation and 6 weeks postnatal. The perspective was health care delivery system. The interventions were usual care, usual care plus an information program, and usual care plus a decision analysis program. The outcome measures were costs to the National Health Service (NHS) in the United Kingdom (UK), score on the Decisional Conflict Scale, and mode of delivery. Results of Main Analysis. Cost of delivery represented 84% of the total cost; mode of delivery was the most important determinant of cost differences across the groups. Mean (SD) total cost per mother and baby: 2033 (677) for usual care, 2069 (738) for information program, and 2019 (741) for decision analysis program. Decision aids reduced decisional conflict. Women using the decision analysis program had fewest cesarean deliveries. Results of Sensitivity Analysis. Applying a cost premium to emergency cesareans over electives had little effect on group comparisons. Conclusions were unaffected. Limitations. Disparity in timing of outcomes and costs, data completeness, and quality. Conclusions. Decision aids can reduce decisional conflict in women with a previous cesarean section when deciding on mode of delivery. The information program could be implemented at no extra cost to the NHS. The decision analysis program might reduce the rate of cesarean sections without any increase in costs

Keywords: . Key words: economic evaluation; cost-consequences; decision aid; repeat cesarean section; vaginal birth after cesarean. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2010
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X09353195 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:30:y:2010:i:4:p:453-463

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X09353195

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().