Centre d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique de Bourgogne, EA 4184, Université de Bourgogne, Dijon, France; Université de Bourgogne, Laboratoire d'Economie et de Gestion, CNRS FRE3496, Dijon, France.
Inserm, CIE1, CHU de Dijon, Dijon, France.
Public Health. 2014 Jan;128(1):43-62. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2013.09.014. Epub 2013 Dec 18.
To analyse published cost-of-illness studies that had assessed the cost of prematurity according to gestational age at birth.
A review of the literature was carried out in March 2011 using the following databases: Medline, ScienceDirect, The Cochrane Library, Econlit and Business Source Premier, and a French Public-Health database. Key-word sequences related to 'prematurity' and 'costs' were considered. Studies that assessed costs according to the gestational age (GA) at the premature birth (<37 weeks of gestation) in industrialized countries and during the last two decades were included. Variations in the reported costs were analysed using a check-list, which allowed the studies to be described according to several methodological and contextual criteria.
A total of 18 studies published since 1990 were included. According to these studies, costs were assessed for different follow-up periods (short, medium or long-term), and for different degrees of prematurity (extreme, early, moderate and late). Results showed that whatever the follow-up period, costs correlated inversely with GA. They also showed considerable variability in costs within the same GA group. Differences between studies could be explained by the choices made, concerning i/the study populations, ii/contextual information, iii/and various economic criteria. Despite these variations, a global trend of costs was estimated in the short-term period using mean costs from four American studies that presented similar methodologies. Costs stand at over US$ 100,000 for extreme prematurity, between US$ 40,000 and US$ 100,000 for early prematurity, between US$ 10,000 and US$ 30,000 for moderate prematurity and below US$ 4500 for late prematurity.
This review underlined not only the clear inverse relationship between costs and GA at birth, but also the difficulty to transfer the results to the French context. It suggests that studies specific to the French health system need to be carried out.
分析已发表的疾病成本研究,这些研究根据出生时的胎龄评估早产儿的成本。
2011 年 3 月,我们使用以下数据库进行了文献回顾:Medline、ScienceDirect、The Cochrane Library、Econlit 和 Business Source Premier 以及一个法国公共卫生数据库。考虑了与“早产”和“成本”相关的关键字序列。纳入了在工业化国家评估早产(<37 孕周)时胎龄(GA)和过去 20 年期间成本的研究。使用清单分析报告成本的变化,该清单允许根据几个方法学和背景标准描述研究。
共纳入 1990 年以来发表的 18 项研究。根据这些研究,成本评估了不同的随访期(短期、中期或长期)和不同程度的早产(极早产、早产、中度早产和晚期早产)。结果表明,无论随访期如何,成本与 GA 呈负相关。它们还表明,在相同的 GA 组内成本存在很大差异。研究之间的差异可以通过以下方面的选择来解释:i/研究人群,ii/背景信息,iii/和各种经济标准。尽管存在这些差异,但使用四项呈现相似方法学的美国研究的平均成本,在短期随访期间估计了成本的总体趋势。极早产的成本超过 10 万美元,早产的成本在 4 万至 10 万美元之间,中度早产的成本在 1 万至 3 万美元之间,晚期早产的成本低于 4500 美元。
该综述不仅强调了成本与出生时 GA 之间的明确反比关系,还强调了将结果转移到法国背景的困难。这表明需要开展针对法国卫生系统的具体研究。