Routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis for RhD-negative women: A systematic review and economic evaluation

Health Technology Assessment

Volumn 13, Issue 10, 2009, Pages

  Pilgrim, H ^a   Lloyd Jones, M ^a   Rees, A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

D GAM; PARTOBULIN; RHESUS D ANTIBODY; RHESUS D ANTIGEN; RHOPHYLAC; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; ALLOANTIBODY; IMMUNOLOGIC FACTOR; RHO(D) ANTIBODY;

ALLERGIC REACTION; ALLOIMMUNIZATION; ANAPHYLAXIS; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL TRIAL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DRUG COST; DRUG INDUCED HEADACHE; FEMALE; FEVER; FLUSHING; HEALTH PROGRAM; HEART PALPITATION; HEPATITIS C; HOT FLUSH; HUMAN; HYPOTENSION; IMMUNOPROPHYLAXIS; INCIDENCE; INJECTION SITE PAIN; INJECTION SITE PRURITUS; INJECTION SITE SWELLING; INTERVENTION STUDY; META ANALYSIS; NAUSEA; NEWBORN HEMOLYTIC DISEASE; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PHOTOTHERAPY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PRIMIGRAVIDA; PROGNOSIS; QUALITY OF LIFE; RECOMMENDED DRUG DOSE; REVIEW; RISK FACTOR; ROUTINE ANTENATAL ANTI D PROPHYLAXIS; SIDE EFFECT; SINGLE DRUG DOSE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TACHYCARDIA; THORAX PAIN; TONGUE SWELLING; VISUAL FIELD DEFECT; VOMITING; WELLBEING; WOMEN'S HEALTH; BLOOD; BLOOD GROUP RHESUS SYSTEM; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; NEWBORN; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY COMPLICATION; PREMEDICATION; PRENATAL CARE; RHESUS ISOIMMUNIZATION;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMMUNOLOGIC FACTORS; INFANT, NEWBORN; ISOANTIBODIES; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY COMPLICATIONS, HEMATOLOGIC; PREMEDICATION; PRENATAL CARE; RH ISOIMMUNIZATION; RH-HR BLOOD-GROUP SYSTEM;

EID: 64149104662     PISSN: 13665278     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3310/hta13100     Document Type: Review

References (178)

1. Chilcott J, Lloyd-Jones M, Wight J, Forman K, Wray J, Beverley C, et al. A review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of routine anti-D prophylaxis for pregnant women who are rhesus (RhD) negative. Health Technol Assess 2003;7:1-72.
2. Stockman JA, III, de Alarcon PA. Overview of the state of the art of Rh disease: history, current clinical management, and recent progress. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2001;23:385-93.
3. MacKenzie I. Antenatal anti-D prophylaxis: one dose or two? Br J Midwifery 2004;12:13-19.
4. Bowman JM. The prevention of Rh immunization. Transfusion Med Rev 1988;2:129-50.
5. Filbey D, Berseus O, Carlberg M. Occurrence of anti-D in RhD-positive mothers and the outcome of the newborns. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1996;75:585-7.
6. Selinger M. Immunoprophylaxis for rhesus disease - expensive but worth it? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1991;98:509-12.
7. Harrod KS, Hanson L, VandeVusse L, Heywood P. Rh negative status and isoimmunization update. A case-based approach to care. J Perinat Neonat Nurs 2003;17:166-78.
8. Tovey LA, Taverner JM. A case for the antenatal administration of anti-D immunoglobulin to primigravidae. Lancet 1981;1:878-81.
9. Urbaniak SJ, Greiss MA. RhD haemolytic disease of the fetus and the newborn. Blood Rev 2000;14:44-61.
10. Contreras M. The prevention of RH haemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn - general background. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 105:7-10.
11. Bowman J. Rh-immunoglobulin: Rh prophylaxis. Best Pract Res Clin Haematol 2006;19:27-34.
12. Bowman JM. Fetomaternal ABO incompatibility and erythroblastosis fetalis. Vox Sang 1986;50:104-6.
13. Tuohy JF, Sangalli M, Kim L. Red blood cell iso-immunisation in the Wellington area of New Zealand: the case for antenatal prophylaxis. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2004;44:458-9.
14. Bowman JM, Friesen AD, Pollock JM, Taylor WE. WinRho: Rh immune globulin prepared by ion exchange for intravenous use. Can Med Assoc J 1980;123:1121-7.
15. Urbaniak SJ. The scientific basis of antenatal prophylaxis. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:11-18.
16. Stewart G, Day RE, Del Priore C, Whittle MJ, Turner TL, Holland BM. Developmental outcome after intravascular intrauterine transfusion for rhesus haemolytic disease. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonat Ed 1994; 70:F52-53.
17. van Kamp IL, Klumper FJ, Bakkum RSLA, Oepkes D, Meerman RH, Scherjon SA, et al. The severity of immune fetal hydrops is predictive of fetal outcome after intrauterine treatment. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001; 185:668-73.
18. Farina A, Calderoni P, Carinci P, Rizzo N. Survival analysis of transfused fetuses affected by Rh-alloimmunization. Prenat Diagn 2000;20:881-5.
19. Craig S, Morris K, Tubman T, McClure B. The fetal and neonatal outcomes of rhesus D antibody affected pregnancies in Northern Ireland. Ir Med J 2000;93:17-18.
20. Matijevic R, Grgic O, Klobucar A, Miskovic B. Diagnosis and management of Rh alloimmunization. Fetal Diagn Ther 2005;20:393-401.
21. Grab D, Paulus WE, Bommer A, Buck G, Terinde R. Treatment of fetal erythroblastosis by intravascular transfusions: outcome at 6 years. Obstet Gynecol 1999;93:165-8.
22. Doyle LW, Kelly EA, Rickards AL, Ford GW, Callanan C. Sensorineural outcome at 2 years for survivors of erythroblastosis treated with fetal intravascular transfusions. Obstet Gynecol 1993;81:931-5.
23. van Kamp IL, Klumper FJCM, Oepkes D, Meerman RH, Scherjon SA, Vandenbussche FPHA, et al. Complications of intrauterine intravascular transfusion for fetal anemia due to maternal red-cell alloimmunization. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;192:171-7.
24. Harper DC, Swingle HM, Wiener CP, Bonthius DJ, Aylward GP, Widness JA. Long-term neurodevelopmental outcome and brain volume after treatment for hydrops fetalis by in utero intravascular transfusion. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;195:192-200.
25. Hudon L, Moise KJ, Jr, Hegemier SE, Hill RM, Moise AA, Smith EO, et al. Long-term neurodevelopmental outcome after intrauterine transfusion for the treatment of fetal hemolytic disease. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;179:858-63.
26. Janssens HM, de Haan MJ, van Kamp I, Brand R, Kanhai HH, Veen S. Outcome for children treated with fetal intravascular transfusions because of severe blood group antagonism. J Pediatr 1997;131:373-80.
27. Ouwehand WH, Goodyear E, Camilleri-Ferrante C, Burgess C, Rankin A. Epidemiology of RhD haemolytic disease of the newborn in East Anglia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:23-4.
28. Das PK, Nair SC, Harris VK, Rose D, Mammen JJ, Bose YN, et al. Distribution of ABO and Rh-D blood groups among blood donors in a tertiary care centre in South India. Trop Doct 2001; 31:47-8.
29. Ali N, Anwar M, Bhatti FA, Nadeem M, Nadeem A, Ali M. Frequency of ABO and Rh blood groups in major ethnic groups and casts of Pakistan. Pakistan J Med Sci 2005;21:26-29.
30. Editorial. Prevention of haemolytic diseases of the newborn due to anti-D. Br Med J Clin Res Ed 1981;282:676-7.
31. Kumar S, Regan F. Management of pregnancies with RhD alloimmunisation. Br Med J 2005;330:1255-8.
32. Joseph KS, Kramer MS. The decline in Rh hemolytic disease: should Rh prophylaxis get all the credit? Am J Public Health 1998; 88:209-15.
33. Robson SC, Lee D, Urbaniak S. Anti-D immunoglobulin in RhD prophylaxis. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:129-34.
34. Duguid JKM, Bromilow IM. What is the true rate of RhD isoimmunisation in the UK? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:33.
35. Clarke CA. Preventing rhesus babies: the Liverpool research and follow up. Arch Dis Child 1989;64:1734-40.
36. Hussey RM, Clarke CA. Deaths from Rh haemolytic disease in England and Wales in 1988 and 1989. Br Med J 1991;303:445-6.
37. Whitfield CR, Raafat A, Urbaniak SJ. Underreporting of mortality from RhD haemolytic disease in Scotland and its implications: retrospective review. Br Med J 1997;315:1504-5.
38. Murphy KW, Whitfield CR. Rhesus disease in this decade. Contemp Rev Obstet Gynaecol 1994;6:61-7.
39. Editorial. Mortality statistics: childhood, infant and perinatal. Review of the Registrar General on deaths in England and Wales, 2005. Series DH3 No. 38. London: Office for National Statistics; 2007
40. Schumacher B, Moise KJ. Fetal transfusion for red blood cell alloimmunization in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 88:137-50.
41. Bjornson KF, McLaughlin JF. The measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQL) in children with cerebral palsy. Eur J Neurol 2001; 8:183-93.
42. Livingston MH, Rosendbuam PL, Russell DJ, Palisano RJ. Quality of life among adolescents with cerebral palsy: what does the literature tell us? Dev Med Child Neurol 2007;49:225-31.
43. Varni JW, Burwinkle TM, Sherman SA, Hanna K, Berrin SJ, Malcarne VL, et al. Health-related quality of life in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy: hearing the voices of the children. Dev Med Child Neurol 2005;47:592-7.
44. Pirpiris M, Gates PE, McCarthy JJ, D'Astous J, Tylkowksi C, Sanders JO, et al. Function and well-being in ambulatory children with cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Orthop 2006;26:119-24.
45. Dickinson HO, Parkinson KN, Ravens-Sieberer U, Schirripa G, Thyen U, Arnaud C, et al. Self-reported quality of life of 8-12-year-old children with cerebral palsy: a cross-sectional European study. Lancet 2007;369:2171-8.
46. Magill-Evans J, Darrah J, Pain K, Adkins R, Kratchovil M. Are families with adolescents and young adults with cerebral palsy the same as other families? Dev Med Child Neurol 2001;43:466-72.
47. Houlihan CM, O'Donnell M, Conaway M, Stevenson RD. Bodily pain and health-related quality of life in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol 2004;46:305-10.
48. van der Dussen L, Nieuwstraten W, Roebroeck M, Stain HJ. Functional level of young adults with cerebral palsy. Clin Rehabil 2001; 15:84-91.
49. Schwartz L, Engel JM, Jensen MP. Pain in persons with cerebral palsy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999;80:1243-6.
50. Jahnsen R, Villien L, Aamodt G, Stanghelle JK, Holm I. Musculoskeletal pain in adults with cerebral palsy compared with the general population. J Rehabil Med 2004;36:78-84.
51. Bottos M, Feliciangeli A, Sciuto L, Gericke C, Vianello A. Functional status of adults with cerebral palsy and implications for treatment of children. Dev Med Child Neurol 2001;43:516-28.
52. Murphy KP, Molnar GE, Lankasky K. Employment and social issues in adults with cerebral palsy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000;81:807-11.
53. Margolis AC. Implications of prelingual deafness. Lancet 2001; 358:76.
54. Wake M, Hughes EK, Collins CM, Poulakis Z. Parent-reported health-related quality of life in children with congenital hearing loss: a population study. Ambul Pediatr 2004;4:411-17.
55. Van Oyen H, Tafforeau J, Demarest S. The impact of hearing disability on well-being and health. Sozial- und Praventivmedizin 2001; 46:335-43.
56. Jacob SR, Scandrett-Hibdon S. Mothers grieving the death of a child. Case reports of maternal grief. Nurse Pract 1994;19:60-5.
57. Badenhorst W, Hughes P. Psychological aspects of perinatal loss. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2007;21:249-59.
58. Hutti MH. Social and professional support needs of families after perinatal loss. J Obstet Gynecol Neonat Nurs 2004;34:630-8.
59. Callister LC. Perinatal loss. A family perspective. J Perinat Neonat Nurs 2006;20:227-34.
60. Vance JC, Foster WJ, Najman JM, Embelton G, Thearle MJ, Hodgen FM. Early parental responses to sudden infant death, stillbirth or neonatal death. Med J Aust 1991;155:292-7.
61. Vance JC, Najman JM, Thearle MJ, Embelton G, Foster WJ, Boyle FM. Psychological changes in parents eight months after the loss of an infant from stillbirth, neonatal death, or sudden infant death syndrome - a longitudinal study. Pediatrics 1995;96:998.
62. Janssen HJEM, Cuisinier MCJ, de Graauw KPHM, Hoogduin KAL. A prospective study of risk factors predicting grief intensity following pregnancy loss. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1997;54:56-61.
63. Zeanah CH, Dailey JV, Rosenblatt MJ, Saller DN. Do women grieve after terminating pregnancies because of fetal anomalies? A controlled investigation. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82:270-5.
64. Kolker A, Burke BM. Grieving the wanted child: ramifications of abortion after prenatal diagnosis of abnormality. Health Care Women Int 1993;14:513-26.
65. Roman A, Pernell M. Late pregnancy complications. In Decherney AH, Nathan L, editors. Current obstetric and gynecologic diagnosis and treatment. 9th edn. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional;2002, pp. 296-300.
66. Brewaeys A. Review: parent-child relationships and child development in donor insemination families. Hum Reprod Update 2001; 7:38-46.
67. Durna EM, Bebe J, Leader LR, Steigrad SJ, Garrett DG. Donor insemination: effects on parents. Med J Aust 1995; 163:248-51.
68. Baron L, Blanco L, Valzacchi GR, Pasqualini S. Oocyte donation (OD) and donor insemination (DI): a comparative psychological study of parents and children. Fertil Steril 1998;70:278S.
69. Bode H, Weidner K, Storck M. Quality of life in families of children with disabilities. Dev Med Child Neurol 2000;42:354.
70. Wake M, Salmon L, Reddihough D. Health status of Australian children with mild to severe cerebral palsy: cross-sectional survey using the Child Health Questionnaire. Dev Med Child Neurol 2003; 45:194-9.
71. Vargus-Adams J. Health-related quality of life in childhood cerebral palsy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005;86:940-5.
72. Brehaut JC, Kohen DE, Raina P, Walter SD, Russell DJ, Swinton M, et al. The health of primary caregivers of children with cerebral palsy: how does it compare with that of other Canadian caregivers? Pediatrics 2004;114:e182-91.
73. Eker L, Tuzun EH. An evaluation of quality of life of mothers of children with cerebral palsy. Disabil Rehabil 2004; 26:1354-9.
74. McConnell D, Llewellyn G. Health of mothers of school-age children with disabilities. Aust N Z J Public Health 2006;30:572-4.
75. Emerson E. Mothers of children and adolescents with intellectual disability: social and economic situation, mental health status, and the self-assessed social and psychological impact of the child's difficulties. J Intellect Disabil Res 2003;47:385-99.
76. Emerson E, Hatton C, Llewellyn G, Blacker J, Graham H. Socio-economic position, household composition, health status and indicators of the well-being of mothers of children with and without intellectual disabilities. J Intellect Disabil Res 2006;50:862-73.
77. Parish SL, Seltzer MM, Greenberg JS, Floyd F. Economic implications of caregiving at midlife: comparing parents with and without children who have developmental disabilities. Ment Retard 2004; 42:413-26.
78. Bat-Chava Y, Martin D. Sibling relationships of deaf children: the impact of child and family characteristics. Rehabil Psychol 2002;47:73-91.
79. Oepkes D, van Scheltema PA. Intrauterine fetal transfusions in the management of fetal anemia and fetal thrombocytopenia. Semin Fetal Neonat Med 2007;12:432-8.
80. British Committee for Standards in Haematology. Guideline for blood grouping and antibody testing in pregnancy; 2006. URL: www.bcshguidelines.com/pdf/pregnancy_070606.pdf.
81. Ulm B, Svolba G, Ulm MR, Bernaschek G, Panzer S. Male fetuses are particularly affected by maternal alloimmunization to D. Transfusion 1999;39:169-73.
82. Murray NA, Roberts IAG. Haemolytic disease of the newborn. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonat Ed 2007;92:F83-8.
83. Howard H, Martlew V, McFadyen I, Clarke C, Duguid J, Bromilow I, et al. Consequences for fetus and neonate of maternal red cell allo-immunisation. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonat Ed 1998; 78:F62-6.
84. Walkinshaw S. Antenatal prophylaxis - proposing. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:25.
85. Mohr PE, Feldman JJ, Dunbar JL, McConkey-Robbins A, Niparko JK, Rittenhouse RK, et al. The societal costs of severe to profound hearing loss in the United States. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2000;16:1120-35.
86. Schroeder L, Petrou S, Kennedy C, McCann D, Law C, Watkin PM, et al. The economic costs of congenital bilateral permanent childhood hearing impairment. Pediatrics 2006;117:1101-12.
87. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guidance on the use of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis for RhD-negative women. Technology Appraisal No. 41. London: NICE; 2002.
88. Lee D, Contreras M, Entwistle CC, Forman KM, Fraser ID, Gascoigne EW, et al. Recommendations for the use of anti-D immunoglobulin. Prescribers' J 1991;31:145.
89. Royal College of Physicians and Royal College of Pathologists. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence review of technology appraisal guidance - No. 41: guidance on the use of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis for RhD-negative women. Submission on behalf of the Royal College of Physicians and the Royal College of Pathologists. London: NICE; 2007.
90. Nottingham City Primary Care Trust. Health technology appraisal: pregnancy - routine anti-D prophylaxis for rhesus negative women (review of TA41). Submission to NICE. 2007.
91. Dash CH. Submission to NICE on the use of anti-D as routine antenatal prophylaxis (RANP) to aid updating technology appraisal guidance. Elstree: Bio Products Laboratory (BPL);2007.
92. CSL Behring UK. Rhophylac® manufacturer's submission. Routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis for Rh D-negative women. Communication to NICE. 2007.
93. CSL Behring UK. Initial comments on the technical content of the assessment report. Communication to NICE. 2008.
94. British Committee for Standards in Haematology. Guidelines for the use of prophylactic anti-D immunoglobulin. London: BCSH; 2006.
95. Finning KM. Prediction of fetal D status from maternal plasma: introduction of a new noninvasive fetal RHD genotyping service. Transfusion 2002;42:1079-85.
96. Daniels G, Finning K, Martin P, Soothill P. Fetal blood group genotyping from DNA from maternal plasma: an important advance in the management and prevention of haemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn. Vox Sang 2004;87:225-32.
97. ACOG practice bulletin. Prevention of Rh D alloimmunization. Number 4, May 1999 (replaces educational bulletin Number 147, October 1990). Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists. American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1999; 66:63-70.
98. Smith JA. Issues in anti-D plasma procurement. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:32.
99. Schiff P, Kelle AJ, Wylie B. Meeting the demand for anti-D in Australia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:32.
100. MacKenzie IZ, Bichler J, Mason GC, Lunan CB, Stewart P, Al-Azzawi F, et al. Efficacy and safety of a new, chromatographically purified rhesus (D) immunoglobulin. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2004;117:154-61.
101. Bowman JM. The advantages of intravenous Rh-immune globulin. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1982;25:341-7.
102. Baxter Healthcare. The clinical and cost-effectiveness of anti-D prophylaxis for rhesus negative women in pregnancy. Submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Compton, Berkshire: Baxter Healthcare Ltd; 2007.
103. Harrop S. Letter from Baxter Healthcare to NICE. 2007.
104. Wickham S. Routine antenatal anti-D - a review of the evidence; 2001. URL: www.bcshguidelines.com/pdf/pregnancy_070606.pdf.
105. Maayan-Metzger A, Schwartz T, Sulkes J, Merlob P. Maternal anti-D prophylaxis during pregnancy does not cause neonatal haemolysis. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonat Ed 2001;84:F60-2.
106. Tabor E. The epidemiology of virus transmission by plasma derivatives: clinical studies verifying the lack of transmission of hepatitis B and C viruses and HIV type 1. Transfusion 1999;39:1160-8.
107. Foster PR, McIntosh RV, Welch AG. Hepatitis C infection from anti-D immunoglobulin. Lancet 1995;346:372.
108. Meisel H, Reip A, Faltus B, Lu M, Porst H, Wiese M, et al. Transmission of hepatitis C virus to children and husbands by women infected with contaminated anti-D immunoglobulin. Lancet 1995; 345:1209-11.
109. Power JP, Lawlor E, Davidson F, Yap PL, Kenny-Walsh F, Whelton MJ, et al. Hepatitis C viraemia in recipients of Irish intravenous anti-D immunoglobulin. Lancet 1994;344:1166-7.
110. Smith DB, Lawlor E, Power J, O'Riordan J, McAllister J, Lycett C, et al. A second outbreak of hepatitis C virus infection from anti-D immunoglobulin in Ireland. Vox Sang 1999;76:175-80.
111. CSL Behring UK. Rhophylac 300 (1500 IU). 2006. URL: http://emc.medicines.org.uk/emc/assets/c/html/DisplayDoc.asp?DocumentID= 12087.
112. Turner ML, Ironside JW. New-variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease: the risk of transmission by blood transfusion. Blood Rev 1998; 12:255-68.
113. Editorial team. Fourth case of transfusion-associated vCJD infection in the United Kingdom. Eurosurveillance 2007;12(3).
114. Burnouf T, Padilla A. Current strategies to prevent transmission of prions by human plasma derivatives. Transfusion Clin Biol 2006; 13:320-8.
115. BPL (Bio Products Laboratory). D-GAM(R), human anti-D immunoglobulin; 2004. URL: www.sahha.gov.mt/ showdoc.aspx?id=771&filesource=4&file=dh50_07_Anti-d⊃c.pdf.
116. British Medical Association and Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. British national formulary (BNF). No. 53, March 2007. London: BMA and RPS; 2007.
117. Baxter Healthcare Ltd. Summary of product characteristics. 2003. www.ecomm.baxter.com/ecatalog/loadResource.do?bid=13716.
118. WinRho(R) SDF product monograph. 2007. www.cangene.com/pdf/2006/ Healthcare%20info%20for%20website%20070109.pdf.
119. Baxter Healthcare Corporation. Rho(D) immune globulin intravenous (human). WinRho(R) SDF; 2005. URL: www.fda.gov/medwatch/SAFETY/2006/ WinRho_PI_%2021-DEC-2005.pdf.
120. Fung Kee Fung K, Eason E, Crane J, Armson A, De La Ronde S, Farine D, et al.; Maternal-Fetal Medicine Committee, Genetics Committee. Prevention of Rh alloimmunization. J Obstet Gynaecol Canada 2003;25:765-73.
121. Chaffe B, Ford J, Bills V. Routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis and patient compliance with the two-dose regimen. Transfusion Med 2007;17:399-403.
122. MacKenzie IZ, Findlay J, Thompson K, Roseman F. Compliance with routine antenatal rhesus D prophylaxis and the impact on sensitisations: observations over 14 years. Int J Obstet Gynaecol 2006; 113:839-43.
123. Royal College of Nursing National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Health technology appraisal: pregnancy - routine anti-D prophylaxis for rhesus negative women (review of TA41). Comments provided by Royal College of Nursing. Submission to NICE; 2007.
124. NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness: CRD's guidance for those carrying out or commissioning reviews. 2nd edn. York: NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination; 2001.
125. Huchet J, Dallemagne S, Huchet C, Brossard Y, Larsen M, Parnet-Mathieu F. Application anté-partum du traitement préventif d'immunisation rhésus D chez les femmes rhésus négatif. Evaluation parallèle des passages transplacentaires d'hématies foetales. Résultats d'une étude multicentrique menée en région parisienne [Ante-partum administration of preventive treatment of Rh-D immunization in rhesus-negative women. Parallel evaluation of transplacental passage of fetal blood cells. Results of a multicenter study carried out in the Paris region]. [French]. Journal de Gynecologie, Obstetrique et Biologie de la Reproduction 1987;16:101-11.
126. MacKenzie IZ, Bowell P, Gregory H, Pratt G, Guest C, Entwistle CC. Routine antenatal Rhesus D immunoglobulin prophylaxis: the results of a prospective 10 year study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 106:492-7.
127. Mayne S, Parker JH, Harden TA, Dodds SD, Beale JA. Rate of EhD sensitisation before and after implementation of a community based antenatal prophylaxis programme. Br Med J 1997;315:1588.
128. Tovey LA, Townley A, Stevenson BJ, Taverner J. The Yorkshire antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin trial in primigravidae. Lancet 1983; 2:244-6.
129. Bowman JM, Chown B, Lewis M, Pollock JM. Rh isoimmunization during pregnancy: antenatal prophylaxis. Can Med Assoc J 1978; 118:623-7.
130. Bowman JM, Pollock JM. Antenatal prophylaxis of Rh isoimmunization: 28-weeks'-gestation service program. Can Med Assoc J 1978; 118:627-30.
131. Bowman JM, Pollock JM. Failures of intravenous Rh immune globulin prophylaxis: an analysis of the reasons for such failures. Transfusion Med Rev 1987;1:101-12.
132. Trolle B. Prenatal Rh-immune prophylaxis with 300 micrograms immune globulin anti-D in the 28th week of pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1989;68:45-7.
133. Thornton JG, Page C, Foote G, Arthur GR, Tovey LA, Scott JS. Efficacy and long term effects of antenatal prophylaxis with anti-D immunoglobulin. Br Med J 1989;298:1671-3.
134. Hermann M, Kjellman H, Ljunggren C. Antenatal prophylaxis of Rh immunization with 250 mcg anti-D immunoglobulin. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1984;63(Suppl 124):4-14.
135. Lee D, Rawlinson VI. Multicentre trial of antepartum low-dose anti-D immunoglobulin. Transfusion Med 1995;5:15-19.
136. Parsons ML, Van den Hoj MC, Armson BA, Coffey J, Liston RM, Peddle LJ, et al. A comparison of the rate of RhD alloimmunisation between Nova Scotia and Scotland. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:39.
137. MacKenzie IZ, Bowell PJ, Pratt G, Gregory H, Guest C, Entwistle CC. Routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis: results of a prospective 10-year study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:25.
138. Eklund J, Nevanlinna HR. [Prevention of Rh immunization in Finland. Results obtained in a two-year national anti-D programme]. [Finnish]. Duodecim 1971;87:861-6.
139. Potron G, Quereux C, Freal C. [Prevention of Rh disease by anti-D plasma. A 2-year study]. [French]. Revue Francaise de Transfusion 1973;16:11-31.
140. Weaver J. A multicentre study to examine the potential effect of monolocal anti-D IgG on prevention of haemolytic disease of the new-born when given routinely to RhD negative pregnant women both antenatally and at delivery. 2000;National Research Register. URL: www.nrr.nhs.uk/.
141. Koelewijn JM. Effect of a single gift of antenatal anti-D-prophylaxis with 1000 IU in week 30 on the incidence of rhesus-D-immunization in the first trimester of next pregnancy. Vox Sang 2003;91:17.
142. Davey MG, Zipursky A. McMaster Conference on prevention of Rh immunization. Vox Sang 1979;36:50-64.
143. Urbaniak J, Greiss A, Promwong C, Witterick R, Burnett J. Alloimmunisation in D negative women following routine antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin prophylaxis (RAADP) in the north east of Scotland: a five-year retrospective study. Vox Sang 2006;91:136-7.
144. MacKenzie IZ, Roseman F, Findlay J, Thompson K, McPherson K. Clinical validation of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis questions the modelling predictions adopted by NICE for rhesus D sensitisation rates: results of a longitudinal study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2007;139(1):38-42.
145. Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP). Note for guidance on the clinical investigation of human anti-D immunoglobulin for intravenous and/or intramuscular use; 2000. URL: www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/bpwg/057599en.pdf.
146. McSweeney E, Kirkham J, Vinall P, Flanagan P. An audit of anti-D sensitisation in Yorkshire. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 105:1091-4.
147. Ghosh S, Murphy WG. Implementation of the rhesus prevention programme: a prospective study. Scott Med J 1994;39:147-9.
148. Gilling-Smith C, Toozs-Hobson P, Potts DJ, Touquet R, Beard RW. Management of bleeding in early pregnancy in accident and emergency departments. Br Med J 1994;309:574-5.
149. Howard H, Martlew VJ, McFadyen IR, Clarke CA. Preventing Rhesus D haemolytic disease of the newborn by giving anti-D immunoglobulin: are the guidelines being adequately followed? J Obstet Gynaecol 1997;104:37-41.
150. Vause S, Maresh M. Indicators of quality of antenatal care: a pilot study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999;106:197-205.
151. Vause S, Wray J, Bailie C. Management of women who are Rhesus D negative in Northern Ireland. J Obstet Gynaecol 2000;20:374-7.
152. Turner RM, Spiegelhalter DJ, Smith GCS, Thompson SG. Bias modelling in evidence synthesis. 2007. URL: www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/BSUsite/ Publications/Preprints/biasmodelling.pdf.
153. Tovey GH. Should anti-D immunoglobulin be given antenatally? Lancet 1980;2:466-8.
154. Crowther CA, Middleton P. Anti-D administration in pregnancy for preventing Rhesus alloimmunisation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1999;1:CD000020.
155. Chilcott J, Lloyd Jones M, Wight J, Forman K, Wray J, Beverley C. Assessment report of the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of routine anti-D prophylaxis for pregnant women who are RhD-negative. NICE; 2002. URL: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ index.jsp?action=download&o=32364.
156. Adams MM, Marks JS, Koplan JP. Cost implications of routine antenatal administration of Rh immune globulin. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984; 149:633-8.
157. Baskett TF, Parsons ML. Prevention of Rh(D) alloimmunization: a cost-benefit analysis. Can Med Assoc J 1990;142:337-9.
158. Lim OW, Fleisher AA, Ziel HK. Reduction of Rh0(D) sensitization: a cost-effective analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1982;59:477-80.
159. Selinger M. The pharmacoeconomics of antenatal prophylaxis. In Building on success: antenatal prophylaxis. London:Bio Products Laboratory; 1997, pp. 6-7.
160. Torrance GW, Zipursky A. Cost-effectiveness of antepartum prevention of Rh immunization. Clin Perinatol 1984;11:267-81.
161. Vick S, Cairns J, Urbaniak S, Whitfield C, Rafaat A. An economic evaluation of antenatal anti-D prophylaxis in Scotland. HERU Discussion paper; 10/95. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University, Health Economics Research Unit; 1995.
162. Vick S, Cairns J, Urbaniak S, Whitfield C, Raafat A. Cost-effectiveness of antenatal anti-D prophylaxis. Health Econ 1996;5:319-28.
163. Tovey LAD. Antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin. Lancet 1983; 2:918.
164. Chilcott J, Tappenden P, Lloyd Jones M, Wight J, Forman K, Wray J, et al. The economics of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis for pregnant women who are rhesus negative. Int J Obstet Gynaecol 2004;111:903-7.
165. Office for National Statistics. Birth statistics. Review of the Registrar General on births and patterns of family building in England and Wales 2005. FM1 No. 34. London: Stationery Office; 2007.
166. Saigal S, Stoskopf B, Pinelli J, Streiner D, Hoult L, Paneth N, et al. Self-perceived health-related quality of life of former extremely low birth weight infants at young adulthood. Pediatrics 2006; 118:1140-8.
167. Curtis L, Netten A. Unit costs of health and social care. Canterbury: PPSRU, University of Kent; 2006.
168. Department of Health. HC12: Charges and optical voucher values. 2007. URL: www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/ PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4131675.
169. Rosenbaum PL, Livingston MH, Palisano RJ, Galuppi BE, Russell DJ. Quality of life and health-related quality of life of adolescents with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol 2007;49:516-21.
170. Beecham J, O'Neill T, Goodman R. Supporting young adults with hemiplegia: services and costs. Health Soc Care Community 2001; 9:51-9.
171. Hemming K, Hutton J, Colver A, Platt MJ. Regional variation in survival of people with cerebral palsy in the United Kingdom. Pediatrics 2005;116:1383.
172. Greenough A, Hartnoll G, Hambley H, Richards J. Treatment requirement of infants with rhesus isoimmunisation within a geographically defined area. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonat Ed 2002;87:F202-3.
173. Department of Health. NHS reference costs 2005-06. URL: www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/ PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_062884; 2006.
174. Oswald A, Powdthavee N. Death and the calculation of hedonic damages. 2007. URL: www.shef.ac.uk/content/1/c6/07/54/59/oswald.pdf.
175. Ospienko L. RhD NIPD in the UK. RhD NIPD Implementation Workshop. Kenilworth, UK: Safe Network; 2007.
176. Bichler J, Schondorfer G, Pabst G, Andresen I. Pharmacokinetics of anti-D IgG in pregnant RhD-negative women. Int J Obstet Gynaecol 2003;110:39-45.
177. Kennedy MS, McNanie J, Waheed A. Detection of anti-D following antepartum injections of Rh immune globulin. Immunohematology 1998;14:138-40.
178. Witter FR, Shirey RS, Nicol SL, Ness PM. Postinjection kinetics of antepartum Rh immune globulin. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 163:786.