• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

CTLB研究的成本分析,这是一项旨在减少分娩常规干预措施的多疗法产前教育项目。

Cost analysis of the CTLB Study, a multitherapy antenatal education programme to reduce routine interventions in labour.

作者信息

Levett Kate M, Dahlen Hannah G, Smith Caroline A, Finlayson Kenneth William, Downe Soo, Girosi Federico

机构信息

School of Medicine, University of Notre Dame Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

National Institute for Complementary Medicines (NICM), Western Sydney University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2018 Feb 8;8(2):e017333. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017333.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017333
PMID:29439002
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5829839/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether the multitherapy antenatal education 'CTLB' (Complementary Therapies for Labour and Birth) Study programme leads to net cost savings.

DESIGN

Cost analysis of the CTLB Study, using analysis of outcomes and hospital funding data.

METHODS

We take a payer perspective and use Australian Refined Diagnosis-Related Group (AR-DRG) cost data to estimate the potential savings per woman to the payer (government or private insurer). We consider scenarios in which the intervention cost is either borne by the woman or by the payer. Savings are computed as the difference in total cost between the control group and the study group.

RESULTS

If the cost of the intervention is not borne by the payer, the average saving to the payer was calculated to be $A808 per woman. If the payer covers the cost of the programme, this figure reduces to $A659 since the average cost of delivering the programme was $A149 per woman. All these findings are significant at the 95% confidence level. Significantly more women in the study group experienced a normal vaginal birth, and significantly fewer women in the study group experienced a caesarean section. The main cost saving resulted from the reduced rate of caesarean section in the study group.

CONCLUSION

The CTLB antenatal education programme leads to significant savings to payers that come from reduced use of hospital resources. Depending on which perspective is considered, and who is responsible for covering the cost of the programme, the net savings vary from $A659 to $A808 per woman. Compared with the average cost of birth in the control group, we conclude that the programme could lead to a reduction in birth-related healthcare costs of approximately 9%.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12611001126909.

摘要

目的

评估多模式产前教育“CTLB”(分娩与生产辅助疗法)研究项目是否能带来净成本节约。

设计

对CTLB研究进行成本分析,采用结果分析和医院资金数据。

方法

我们从支付方的角度出发,使用澳大利亚精细化诊断相关组(AR-DRG)成本数据来估计每位女性为支付方(政府或私人保险公司)带来的潜在节约。我们考虑了干预成本由女性承担或由支付方承担的情况。节约金额通过计算对照组和研究组之间的总成本差异得出。

结果

如果干预成本不由支付方承担,计算得出支付方为每位女性的平均节约金额为808澳元。如果支付方承担该项目的成本,这一数字降至659澳元,因为该项目的人均成本为149澳元。所有这些结果在95%置信水平上具有统计学意义。研究组中顺产的女性显著更多,剖宫产的女性显著更少。主要的成本节约来自研究组剖宫产率的降低。

结论

CTLB产前教育项目为支付方带来了显著的节约,这源于医院资源使用的减少。根据所考虑的角度以及谁负责承担项目成本,每位女性的净节约金额在659澳元至808澳元之间。与对照组的平均分娩成本相比,我们得出该项目可使与分娩相关的医疗保健成本降低约9%。

试验注册号

ACTRN12611001126909。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5694/5829839/7ddb98680f91/bmjopen-2017-017333f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5694/5829839/9cafb027bf40/bmjopen-2017-017333f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5694/5829839/7ddb98680f91/bmjopen-2017-017333f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5694/5829839/9cafb027bf40/bmjopen-2017-017333f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5694/5829839/7ddb98680f91/bmjopen-2017-017333f02.jpg

相似文献

1
Cost analysis of the CTLB Study, a multitherapy antenatal education programme to reduce routine interventions in labour.CTLB研究的成本分析,这是一项旨在减少分娩常规干预措施的多疗法产前教育项目。
BMJ Open. 2018 Feb 8;8(2):e017333. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017333.
2
Complementary therapies for labour and birth study: a randomised controlled trial of antenatal integrative medicine for pain management in labour.分娩与产时辅助疗法研究:一项关于产前综合医学用于分娩疼痛管理的随机对照试验
BMJ Open. 2016 Jul 12;6(7):e010691. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010691.
3
The Complementary Therapies for Labour and Birth Study making sense of labour and birth - Experiences of women, partners and midwives of a complementary medicine antenatal education course.分娩与产时辅助疗法研究:理解分娩过程——补充医学产前教育课程中女性、伴侣及助产士的体验
Midwifery. 2016 Sep;40:124-31. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2016.06.011. Epub 2016 Jun 9.
4
A cluster-randomized trial to reduce caesarean delivery rates in Quebec: cost-effectiveness analysis.一项旨在降低魁北克剖宫产率的整群随机试验:成本效益分析。
BMC Med. 2017 May 22;15(1):96. doi: 10.1186/s12916-017-0859-8.
5
A cost effectiveness analysis of midwife psycho-education for fearful pregnant women - a health system perspective for the antenatal period.从卫生系统角度看,对恐惧孕妇进行助产士心理教育的成本效益分析——孕期视角
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Jul 11;17(1):217. doi: 10.1186/s12884-017-1404-7.
6
Cost-effectiveness of induction of labour at term with a Foley catheter compared to vaginal prostaglandin E₂ gel (PROBAAT trial).足月时使用 Foley 导管与阴道前列腺素 E₂ 凝胶(PROBAAT 试验)引产的成本效益比较。
BJOG. 2013 Jul;120(8):987-95. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12221. Epub 2013 Mar 26.
7
Reducing caesarean delivery: An economic evaluation of routine induction of labour at 39 weeks in low-risk nulliparous women.降低剖宫产率:低危初产妇 39 周常规引产的经济学评价。
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2020 Jan;34(1):3-11. doi: 10.1111/ppe.12621. Epub 2019 Dec 29.
8
Non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section.减少不必要剖宫产的非临床干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jun 15(6):CD005528. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005528.pub2.
9
10
Epidural analgesia during labour, routinely or on request: a cost-effectiveness analysis.分娩期间常规或按需进行硬膜外镇痛:一项成本效益分析。
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016 Dec;207:23-31. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.07.488. Epub 2016 Sep 22.

引用本文的文献

1
Differences in women's experiences of labour according to type of fetal monitoring: a quantitative analysis of an Australian national survey.根据胎儿监护类型分析女性分娩经历的差异:一项澳大利亚全国性调查的定量分析
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2025 May 13;25(1):565. doi: 10.1186/s12884-025-07509-z.
2
Outcomes of Childbirth Education for Women With Pregnancy Complications.妊娠并发症妇女分娩教育的结果
J Perinat Educ. 2023 May 1;32(2):94-103. doi: 10.1891/JPE-2022-0006.
3
Perinatal Education Participation: Description and Identification of Disparities.

本文引用的文献

1
An economic evaluation of planned immediate versus delayed birth for preterm prelabour rupture of membranes: findings from the PPROMT randomised controlled trial.计划性早产胎膜早破即刻分娩与延迟分娩的经济学评价:来自 PPROMT 随机对照试验的结果。
BJOG. 2017 Mar;124(4):623-630. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14302. Epub 2016 Oct 21.
2
The Complementary Therapies for Labour and Birth Study making sense of labour and birth - Experiences of women, partners and midwives of a complementary medicine antenatal education course.分娩与产时辅助疗法研究:理解分娩过程——补充医学产前教育课程中女性、伴侣及助产士的体验
Midwifery. 2016 Sep;40:124-31. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2016.06.011. Epub 2016 Jun 9.
3
围产期教育参与情况:差异描述与识别
J Perinat Educ. 2022 Jul 1;31(3):161-170. doi: 10.1891/JPE-2021-0009.
4
Birth outcomes by type of attendance at antenatal education: An observational study.分娩结局与产前教育参与类型的关系:一项观察性研究。
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2022 Dec;62(6):859-867. doi: 10.1111/ajo.13541. Epub 2022 May 17.
5
What would reduce caesarean section rates?-Views from pregnant women and clinicians in Ireland.哪些因素可以降低剖宫产率?——爱尔兰孕妇和临床医生的观点。
PLoS One. 2022 Apr 28;17(4):e0267465. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267465. eCollection 2022.
6
The changing clinical landscape in acupuncture for women's health: a cross-sectional online survey in New Zealand and Australia.针灸在女性健康领域不断变化的临床状况:新西兰和澳大利亚的一项横断面在线调查。
BMC Complement Med Ther. 2022 Mar 31;22(1):94. doi: 10.1186/s12906-022-03576-3.
7
The AEDUCATE Collaboration. Comprehensive antenatal education birth preparation programmes to reduce the rates of caesarean section in nulliparous women. Protocol for an individual participant data prospective meta-analysis.AEDUCATE协作组。全面的产前教育分娩准备计划以降低初产妇剖宫产率。个体参与者数据前瞻性荟萃分析方案。
BMJ Open. 2020 Sep 23;10(9):e037175. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037175.
Complementary therapies for labour and birth study: a randomised controlled trial of antenatal integrative medicine for pain management in labour.
分娩与产时辅助疗法研究:一项关于产前综合医学用于分娩疼痛管理的随机对照试验
BMJ Open. 2016 Jul 12;6(7):e010691. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010691.
4
WHO Statement on Caesarean Section Rates.世界卫生组织关于剖宫产率的声明。
BJOG. 2016 Apr;123(5):667-70. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.13526. Epub 2015 Jul 22.
5
Self-hypnosis for intrapartum pain management in pregnant nulliparous women: a randomised controlled trial of clinical effectiveness.未生育孕妇分娩期疼痛管理的自我催眠:一项临床疗效的随机对照试验
BJOG. 2015 Aug;122(9):1226-34. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.13433. Epub 2015 May 11.
6
Acupuncture and acupressure for pain management in labour and birth: a critical narrative review of current systematic review evidence.针灸和指压法用于分娩时的疼痛管理:对当前系统评价证据的批判性叙述性综述
Complement Ther Med. 2014 Jun;22(3):523-40. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2014.03.011. Epub 2014 Apr 13.
7
The influence of complementary and alternative medicine use in pregnancy on labor pain management choices: results from a nationally representative sample of 1,835 women.孕期使用补充和替代医学对分娩疼痛管理选择的影响:来自全国代表性样本 1835 名女性的结果。
J Altern Complement Med. 2014 Feb;20(2):87-97. doi: 10.1089/acm.2013.0171. Epub 2013 Aug 21.
8
Rates of obstetric intervention during birth and selected maternal and perinatal outcomes for low risk women born in Australia compared to those born overseas.与在海外出生的低风险女性相比,澳大利亚出生的低风险女性在分娩期间的产科干预率以及选定的孕产妇和围产期结局。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2013 May 1;13:100. doi: 10.1186/1471-2393-13-100.
9
Rates of obstetric intervention among low-risk women giving birth in private and public hospitals in NSW: a population-based descriptive study.新南威尔士州私立和公立医院中低风险产妇的产科干预率:一项基于人群的描述性研究。
BMJ Open. 2012 Sep 10;2(5). doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001723. Print 2012.
10
Pain management for women in labour: an overview of systematic reviews.分娩期女性的疼痛管理:系统评价综述
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Mar 14;2012(3):CD009234. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009234.pub2.