Affiliation:
1. School of Medicine, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada
2. College of Osteopathic Medicine, Touro University Nevada, Henderson, Nevada
3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
4. Las Vegas Minimally Invasive Surgery and Women's Pelvic Health Center (A Davita Medical Group), Las Vegas, Nevada
Abstract
Objectives This article estimates and compares public health costs of universal versus risk-based intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) administration for women with unknown Group B streptococcus (GBS) status at term.
Study Design The annual number of women in the U.S. who are: unscreened for GBS, without risk factors, delivering vaginally, multiparous, and eligible for discharge within 24 hours was estimated. Under the risk-based strategy, women and neonates were assumed to stay another day for observation and incur the cost of an additional 24-hour stay. With universal IAP administration, women delivering without complications were assumed to be discharged within 24 hours, with an incurred cost of penicillin.
Results The estimated cost for the risk-based management of unscreened women at term without rupture of membranes (ROM) > 18 hours ranged from $468,886,831 to $850,556,179. Similarly, the cost of managing unscreened women without maternal intrapartum fever (MIF) ranged from $742,024,791 to $919,269,233. Alternatively, universal IAP administration costs ranged from $470,107,674 to $568,359,086.5. Cost comparisons yielded an equivalence or up to a 33.2% reduction in cost, and 36.6 to 38.2% reduction in cost for women without ROM > 18 hours and MIF, respectively.
Conclusions Universal IAP may be cost saving due to the reduction in extended hospitalizations for neonates and healthy mothers.
Subject
Obstetrics and Gynaecology,Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献