Choosing options for ultrasound screening in pregnancy and comparing cost effectiveness: A decision analysis approach

BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 105, Issue 9, 1998, Pages 960-970

  Roberts, Tracy ^a   Mugford, Miranda ^b   Piercy, James ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONGENITAL MALFORMATION; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DOWN SYNDROME; FETUS ECHOGRAPHY; FETUS OUTCOME; HEART DISEASE; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PRENATAL SCREENING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PURCHASING; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SPINA BIFIDA;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DOWN SYNDROME; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FAMILY PRACTICE; FEMALE; FETUS; GREAT BRITAIN; HOSPITAL COSTS; HOSPITALS, MATERNITY; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PREGNANCY TRIMESTER, FIRST; PREVALENCE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPINAL DYSRAPHISM; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, PRENATAL;

EID: 0031663841     PISSN: 14700328     EISSN: 14710528     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1998.tb10258.x     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Chitty LS. Ultrasound screening for fetal abnormalities. Prenat Diagn 1995; 15:1241–57.
2. Neilson JP. Routine ultrasonography in early pregnancy. In Enkin MW, Keirse MJNCRMJ, Neilson JP, editors. Pregnancy and childbirth. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 2 edition. Oxford: Update Software, 1995.
3. Neilson JP. Routine fetal anthropometry in late pregnancy. In Enkin MW, Keirse MJNCRMJ, Neilson JP, editors. Pregnancy and childbirth. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Issue 2 edition. Oxford: Update Software, 1995.
4. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Report of the Working Party on Ultrasound Screening for Fetal Abnormalities [consultation document] London: RCOG, 1997.
5. Hay S, McLean E. The timing and content of routine obstetric ultrasound in the United Kingdom. London: Report of the College of Radiographers, 1994.
6. Bakketeig LS, Eik-Nes SH, Jacobsen G et al. Randomised controlled trial of ultrasonographic screening in pregnancy. Luncet 1984; 2: 207–10.
7. Sculpher M, Drummond M, Buxton M. Economic evaluation in health care research and development: undertake it early and often. Discussion Paper No. 12, Uxbridge, Middlesex: Brunel University Health Economics Research Group, 1995.
8. Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Guyatt GH et al. Clinical Epidemiology: a Basic Science for Clinical Medicine, Boston: Little, Brown and Co, 1991.
9. Weinstein MC, Fineberg HV. Clinical Decision Analysis. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1980.
10. Hackshaw A. Serum, urine and ultrasound screening study (SURUSS). Reverberations: J U K Assoc Ultrason 1997; 1: 15–18.
11. Kline J, Stein Z, Susser M. Conception to Birth: Epidemiolugy of Prenatal Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989.
12. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Report of the RCOG Working Party on Biochemical Markers and Detection of Down's Syndrome. London: RCOG, 1993.
13. MacFarlane AJ, Mugford M, Johnson A, Garcia J. Counting the changes in childbirth: trends and gaps in national statistics. Oxford: National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, 1995.
14. Macfarlane A, Johnson A, Mugford M. Epidemiology. In: Robertson, NRC Testbook of Neonatology. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1992: 3–27.
15. Lieu TA, Watson SE, Washington AE. The cost-effectiveness of prenatal carrier screening for cystic fibrosis. Obstet Gynecol 1994; 84: 903–912.
16. Cuckle HS, Richardson GA, Sheldon TA, Quirke P. Cost effectiveness of antenatal screening for cystic fibrosis. BMJ 1995; 311: 1460–1464.
17. Morris JK, Oppenheimer PM. Cost comparison of different methods of screening for cystic fibrosis. J Med Screen 1995; 2: 22–27.
18. Fletcher J, Hicks NR, Kay JDS, Boyd PA. Using decision analysis to compare policies for antenatal screening for Down's syndrome. BMJ 1995; 311: 351–356.
19. Shackley P, McGuire A, Boyd PA et al. An economic appraisal of alternative pre-natal screening programmes for Down's syndrome. J Public Health Med 1993; 15: 175–184.
20. Temmerman M, Buekens P. Cost-effectiveness of routine ultrasound examination in first trimester of pregnancy. Eur J Ohstet Gynecol Reprod Bid 1991; 39: 3–6.
21. Hahn R, Ho S, Roi H, Bulgarin-Viera M, Davies T, McMilban Rodney W. Cost-effectiveness of office obstetrical ultrasound in family practice: preliminary considerations. J Am Board Fam Pract 1988; 1: 33–38.
22. DeVore GR. The routine antenatal diagnostic imaging with ultrasound study: another perspective. J Obstet Gynuecol 1994; 84: 622–626.
23. Pitkin RM. Screening and detection of congenital malformation. Am J Obstef Gynecol 1990; 164: 104–1048.
24. Torgerson DJ, Spencer A. Marginal costs and benefits BMJ 1996; 312: 35–36.