Scarf Vanessa, Catling Christine, Viney Rosalie, Homer Caroline
Centre for Midwifery, Child and Family Heath, University of Technology Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Centre for Health Economic Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 18;11(2):e0149463. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149463. eCollection 2016.
There is demand from women for alternatives to giving birth in a standard hospital setting however access to these services is limited. This systematic review examines the literature relating to the economic evaluations of birth setting for women at low risk of complications.
Searches of the literature to identify economic evaluations of different birth settings of the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EconLit, Business Source Complete and Maternity and Infant care. Relevant English language publications were chosen using keywords and MeSH terms between 1995 and 2015. Inclusion criteria included studies focussing on the comparison of birth setting. Data were extracted with respect to study design, perspective, PICO principles, and resource use and cost data.
Eleven studies were included from Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, the USA, and the UK. Four studies compared costs between homebirth and the hospital setting and the remaining seven focussed on the cost of birth centre care and the hospital setting. Six studies used a cost-effectiveness analysis and the remaining five studies used cost analysis and cost comparison methods. Eight of the 11 studies found a cost saving in the alternative settings. Two found no difference in the cost of the alternative settings and one found an increase in birth centre care.
There are few studies that compare the cost of birth setting. The variation in the results may be attributable to the cost data collection processes, difference in health systems and differences in which costs were included. A better understanding of the cost of birth setting is needed to inform policy makers and service providers.
女性对于在标准医院环境以外的地方分娩有需求,然而获得这些服务的途径有限。本系统评价考察了与低并发症风险女性分娩环境的经济评估相关的文献。
检索文献以识别以下电子数据库中不同分娩环境的经济评估:医学期刊数据库(MEDLINE)、护理学与健康领域数据库(CINAHL)、经济学文献数据库(EconLit)、商业资源完整版数据库(Business Source Complete)以及母婴护理数据库。使用关键词和医学主题词(MeSH)从1995年至2015年期间选择相关的英文出版物。纳入标准包括聚焦于分娩环境比较的研究。提取有关研究设计、视角、PICO原则以及资源使用和成本数据的数据。
纳入了来自澳大利亚、加拿大、荷兰、挪威、美国和英国的11项研究。4项研究比较了家庭分娩和医院分娩环境之间的成本,其余7项研究聚焦于分娩中心护理和医院分娩环境的成本。6项研究使用了成本效益分析,其余5项研究使用了成本分析和成本比较方法。11项研究中的8项发现在替代环境中有成本节约。2项研究发现替代环境的成本没有差异,1项研究发现分娩中心护理成本增加。
比较分娩环境成本的研究很少。结果的差异可能归因于成本数据收集过程、卫生系统的差异以及所纳入成本的差异。需要更好地了解分娩环境的成本,以为政策制定者和服务提供者提供信息。