Rogowski J
RAND Corporation, Washington, DC 20005, USA.
Pediatrics. 1998 Jul;102(1 Pt 1):35-43. doi: 10.1542/peds.102.1.35.
Very low birth weight (VLBW)infants (those with birth weights <1500 g) account for only 1.2% of births but 46% of infant deaths. Large improvements in neonatal technology in the last 2 decades have significantly improved survival prospects for infants with low birth weights, but at a high cost. Due largely to a lack of data, the costs of medical care during the period in which infant mortality is measured (the first year of life), as well as the cost-effectiveness of that care for VLBW infants, have not been quantified. Despite this fact, public policies both toward providing insurance coverage for their care, as well as denying payment for their treatment, have either been proposed or implemented on cost-effectiveness grounds.
The study includes all VLBW single live births in the state of California during 1986 and 1987 that were continuously eligible (through traditional channels) for the state's Medicaid program.
Treatment costs were measured for all medical care received during the first year of life, including all inpatient and outpatient care received. The cost-effectiveness of care is measured by aggregate treatment costs for all singleton VLBW liveborns divided by the number of first-year survivors.
Average treatment costs per first-year survivor for infants <1500 g was $93 800 (in 1987 constant dollars). Treatment costs per survivor were twice as high for infants <750 g ($273 900) as for the next highest birth weight group 750 to 999 g ($138 800) which was itself almost twice as high as for the 1000 to 1249 g group ($75 100). The gradient in cost-effectiveness with birth weight then drops off to $58 000 per survivor for infants with birth weights between 1250 and 1499 g.
Public policies aimed at improving birth outcomes by providing insurance coverage for pregnant women and children, such as the recent Medicaid expansions, can potentially be very cost-effective. Although maternal interventions such as prenatal care are relatively inexpensive, each normal birth that results instead in a VLBW birth saves $59 700 in first year medical expenses. However, cost savings attributable to increased birth weights depend on where in the birth weight distribution the increase occurs as well as the size of the birth weight increase. For infants with birth weights >750 g, significant gains can accrue from even a small shift in the birth weight distribution. A shift of 250 g at birth saves an average of $12 000 to $16 000 in first year medical costs and a shift of 500 g generates $28 000 in savings. However, there is a threshold effect on birth weight. For infants <750 g, increases in birth weight may increase medical expenditures. For instance, a shift in birth weight to the 750 to 999 g range increases costs by $29 000.
极低出生体重(VLBW)婴儿(出生体重<1500克)仅占出生总数的1.2%,但却占婴儿死亡总数的46%。过去20年里,新生儿技术有了很大改进,显著改善了低体重婴儿的生存前景,但成本高昂。很大程度上由于缺乏数据,婴儿死亡率衡量期间(生命的第一年)的医疗护理成本以及针对极低出生体重婴儿护理的成本效益尚未得到量化。尽管如此,基于成本效益的理由,已经提出或实施了有关为其护理提供保险覆盖以及拒绝为其治疗付款的公共政策。
该研究纳入了1986年和1987年加利福尼亚州所有单胎活产的极低出生体重婴儿,这些婴儿(通过传统渠道)持续符合该州医疗补助计划的资格。
衡量生命第一年接受的所有医疗护理的治疗成本,包括所有住院和门诊护理。护理的成本效益通过所有单胎极低出生体重活产儿的总治疗成本除以第一年存活者数量来衡量。
出生体重<1500克的婴儿,每位第一年存活者的平均治疗成本为93,800美元(按1987年不变美元计算)。出生体重<750克的婴儿每位存活者的治疗成本(273,900美元)是次高出生体重组750至999克(138,800美元)的两倍,而该组本身几乎是出生体重1000至1249克组(75,100美元)的两倍。然后,随着出生体重增加,成本效益梯度下降至出生体重在1250至1499克之间的婴儿每位存活者58,000美元。
旨在通过为孕妇和儿童提供保险覆盖来改善出生结局的公共政策,例如近期医疗补助计划的扩大,可能具有很高的成本效益。尽管产前护理等孕产妇干预措施相对便宜,但每例正常出生却导致极低出生体重儿出生,可在第一年节省59,700美元的医疗费用。然而,出生体重增加带来的成本节省取决于出生体重分布中增加发生的位置以及出生体重增加的幅度。对于出生体重>750克的婴儿,即使出生体重分布有小的变化也能带来显著收益。出生时体重增加250克平均可在第一年节省12,000至16,000美元的医疗成本,体重增加500克可节省28,000美元。然而,出生体重存在阈值效应。对于出生体重<750克的婴儿,出生体重增加可能会增加医疗支出。例如,出生体重转移到750至999克范围会使成本增加29,000美元。