Hu Delphine, Grossman Daniel, Levin Carol, Blanchard Kelly, Adanu Richard, Goldie Sue J
Center for Health Decision Science, Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston MA, USA.
Afr J Reprod Health. 2010 Jun;14(2):85-103.
To explore the policy implications of increasing access to safe abortion in Nigeria and Ghana, we developed a computer-based decision analytic model which simulates induced abortion and its potential complications in a cohort of women, and comparatively assessed the cost-effectiveness of unsafe abortion and three first-trimester abortion modalities: hospital-based dilatation and curettage, hospital- and clinic-based manual vacuum aspiration (MVA), and medical abortion using misoprostol (MA). Assuming all modalities are equally available, clinic-based MVA is the most cost-effective option in Nigeria. If clinic-based MVA is not available, MA is the next best strategy. Conversely, in Ghana, MA is the most cost-effective strategy, followed by clinic-based MVA if MA is not available. From a real world policy perspective, increasing access to safe abortion in favor over unsafe abortion is the single most important factor in saving lives and societal costs, and is more influential than the actual choice of safe abortion modality.
为探讨在尼日利亚和加纳增加安全堕胎可及性的政策影响,我们开发了一个基于计算机的决策分析模型,该模型模拟了一组女性中的人工流产及其潜在并发症,并比较评估了不安全堕胎和三种孕早期堕胎方式的成本效益:医院刮宫术、医院及诊所的手动真空吸引术(MVA)以及使用米索前列醇的药物流产(MA)。假设所有方式均可同等获取,基于诊所的MVA在尼日利亚是最具成本效益的选择。如果无法获得基于诊所的MVA,药物流产是次优策略。相反,在加纳,药物流产是最具成本效益的策略,如果无法获得药物流产,则基于诊所的MVA次之。从现实世界的政策角度来看,增加安全堕胎的可及性以取代不安全堕胎是拯救生命和节省社会成本的最重要单一因素,并且比安全堕胎方式的实际选择更具影响力。