Colbourn Tim E, Asseburg Christian, Bojke Laura, Philips Zoe, Welton Nicky J, Claxton Karl, Ades A E, Gilbert Ruth E
Centre for Paediatric Epidemiology and Biostatistics, UCL Institute of Child Health, London WC1N 1EH.
BMJ. 2007 Sep 29;335(7621):655. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39325.681806.AD. Epub 2007 Sep 11.
To determine the cost effectiveness of strategies for preventing neonatal infection with group B streptococci and other bacteria in the UK and the value of further information from research.
Use of a decision model to compare the cost effectiveness of prenatal testing for group B streptococcal infection (by polymerase chain reaction or culture), prepartum antibiotic treatment (intravenous penicillin or oral erythromycin), and vaccination during pregnancy (not yet available) for serious bacterial infection in early infancy across 12 maternal risk groups. Model parameters were estimated using multi-parameter evidence synthesis to incorporate all relevant data inputs.
32 systematic reviews were conducted: 14 integrated results from published studies, 24 involved analyses of primary datasets, and five included expert opinion. Main outcomes measures Healthcare costs per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained.
Current best practice (to treat only high risk women without prior testing for infection) and universal testing by culture or polymerase chain reaction were not cost effective options. Immediate extension of current best practice to treat all women with preterm and high risk term deliveries without testing (11% treated) would result in substantial net benefits. Currently, addition of culture testing for low risk term women, while treating all preterm and high risk term women, would be the most cost effective option (21% treated). If available in the future, vaccination combined with treating all preterm and high risk term women and no testing for low risk women would probably be marginally more cost effective and would limit antibiotic exposure to 11% of women. The value of information is highest (67m pounds sterling) if vaccination is included as an option.
Extension of current best practice to treat all women with preterm and high risk term deliveries is readily achievable and would be beneficial. The choice between adding culture testing for low risk women or vaccination for all should be informed by further research. Trials to evaluate vaccine efficacy should be prioritised.
确定在英国预防新生儿B族链球菌及其他细菌感染策略的成本效益以及来自研究的更多信息的价值。
使用决策模型比较针对12个母亲风险组中早发严重细菌感染的B族链球菌感染产前检测(通过聚合酶链反应或培养)、产前三抗生素治疗(静脉注射青霉素或口服红霉素)以及孕期接种疫苗(尚未可用)的成本效益。模型参数通过多参数证据综合进行估计,以纳入所有相关数据输入。
进行了32项系统评价:14项整合了已发表研究的结果,24项涉及对原始数据集的分析,5项纳入了专家意见。主要结局指标为每获得一个质量调整生命年(QALY)的医疗保健成本。
当前最佳实践(仅治疗高危女性且不进行感染的预先检测)以及通过培养或聚合酶链反应进行普遍检测并非具有成本效益的选择。立即将当前最佳实践扩展至治疗所有早产和高危足月分娩的女性而不进行检测(11%接受治疗)将带来显著的净效益。目前,在治疗所有早产和高危足月女性的同时,为低危足月女性增加培养检测将是最具成本效益的选择(21%接受治疗)。如果未来可用,疫苗接种结合治疗所有早产和高危足月女性且不对低危女性进行检测可能在成本效益上略高,并将抗生素暴露限制在11%的女性。如果将疫苗接种作为一种选择,信息价值最高(6700万英镑)。
将当前最佳实践扩展至治疗所有早产和高危足月分娩的女性很容易实现且有益。在为低危女性增加培养检测或为所有人接种疫苗之间的选择应依据进一步的研究。应优先进行评估疫苗疗效的试验。