Poncet Bénédicte, Touzet Sandrine, Rocher Laure, Berland Michel, Orgiazzi Jacques, Colin Cyrille
Unité d'évaluation médico-économique, Département d'Information Médicale, Hospices Civils de Lyon, LASS-UMR 5823 CNRS, 162 Avenue Lacassagne, 69424 Cedex 03, Lyon, France.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2002 Jul 10;103(2):122-9. doi: 10.1016/s0301-2115(02)00042-8.
To compare three strategies for gestational diabetes screening (i) screening of high-risk pregnant women with the 50 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT); (ii) screening of all pregnant women with the 50 g OGTT; (iii) screening of all pregnant women according to the 75 g OGTT.
Cost-effectiveness analysis. The outcome measures, i.e. macrosomia, prematurity, perinatal mortality, hypertensive disorders rates were estimated from published studies and the costs from a prospective study involving 120 pregnant women.
Compared to the first strategy, the cost to obtain one unit of additional effectiveness with the second screening strategy, was up to 1.1 times more expensive, and with the third strategy was up to 3.7 times more expensive.
The costs per case prevented reflect a favourable cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) for screening of high-risk pregnant women by 50 g oral glucose test.
比较三种妊娠期糖尿病筛查策略：（i）采用50克口服葡萄糖耐量试验（OGTT）对高危孕妇进行筛查；（ii）采用50克OGTT对所有孕妇进行筛查；（iii）根据75克OGTT对所有孕妇进行筛查。
成本效益分析。通过已发表的研究估算结局指标，即巨大儿、早产、围产儿死亡率、高血压疾病发生率，并从前瞻性研究中涉及的120名孕妇获取成本数据。
与第一种策略相比，第二种筛查策略每获得一个单位额外效果的成本高出1.1倍，而第三种策略则高出3.7倍。
通过50克口服葡萄糖试验筛查高危孕妇，每预防一例病例的成本反映出良好的成本效益比（CER）。
