Recency of migration, region of origin and women's experience of maternity care in England: Evidence from a large cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, changes to legislation in 2003 regarding the free movement of people in the European Union resulted in an increase in immigration from countries that joined the EU since 2004, the Accession countries. OBJECTIVE: To describe and compare the maternity experiences of recent migrant mothers to those who had been resident in the UK for longer, and to UK-born women, while taking into account their region of origin. DESIGN: Cross-sectional national survey. SETTING: England, 2009. PARTICIPANTS: Random sample of postpartum women. MEASUREMENTS: Questionnaires asked about demographic characteristics, care during pregnancy, labour, birth and postnatally, about country of origin and, if not born in the UK, when they came to the UK. Country of origin was grouped into UK, Accession countries, and rest of the world. Recency of migration was grouped into recent arrivals (0-3 years), and earlier arrivals (4 or more years since arrival). Descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression were used to explore women's experiences of care. Stratified analyses were used to account for the strong correlation between recency of migration and region of origin. FINDINGS: Overall, 5332 women responded to the survey (a usable response rate of 54%). Seventy-nine percent of women were UK-born. Of the 21% born outside the UK, a third were born in Accession countries. All migrants reported a poorer experience of care than UK-born women. In particular, recent migrants from the Accession countries were significantly less likely to feel that they were spoken to so they could understand and treated with kindness and respect. CONCLUSIONS: Given the rising population of non-UK-born women of childbearing age resident in the UK and the relatively high proportion from Accession countries, it is important that staff are able to communicate effectively, through interpreters if necessary. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The differences in clinical practice between women's home countries and the UK should be discussed so that women's expectations of care are informed about the options available to them.

The role of support and other factors in early breastfeeding cessation: an analysis of data from a maternity survey in England.

BACKGROUND: Although the majority of women in England initiate breastfeeding, approximately one third cease breastfeeding by six weeks and many of these women report they would like to have breastfed for longer. METHODS: Data from a survey of women ≥16 years who gave birth to singleton term infants in 2009 in England; questionnaires were completed approximately three months postnatally. Logistic regression was used to investigate the association between postnatal support and other factors, and breastfeeding cessation at 10 days and six weeks. Population attributable fractions (PAFs) were calculated to estimate the relative contribution of breastfeeding support factors to overall breastfeeding cessation at these two time points. RESULTS: Of the 3840 women who initiated breastfeeding and reported timing of breastfeeding cessation, 13% had stopped by 10 days; and of the 3354 women who were breastfeeding at 10 days, 17% had stopped by six weeks. Socio-demographic factors (maternal age, ethnicity, country of birth, deprivation, education) and antenatal feeding intention were all independently associated with breastfeeding cessation at 10 days and six weeks. Women who did not receive feeding advice or support from a parent or peer support group, voluntary organisation, or breastfeeding clinic were more likely to stop breastfeeding by 10 days. Perceived active support and encouragement from midwives was associated with a lower odds of breastfeeding cessation at both 10 days and six weeks. Estimated PAFs suggest that 34-59% of breastfeeding cessations by 10 days could be avoided if more women in the study population received breastfeeding support. CONCLUSION: Although multiple factors influence a mother's likelihood of continuing breastfeeding, it is clear that socio-demographic factors are strongly associated with breastfeeding continuation. However, there is evidence that breastfeeding support, including that delivered by peer or lay support workers, may have an important role in preventing cessations in the first few weeks.

Cost-effectiveness of therapeutic hypothermia to treat neonatal encephalopathy.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness (CE) of total body hypothermia plus intensive care versus intensive care alone to treat neonatal encephalopathy. METHODS: Decision analytic modeling was used to synthesize mortality and morbidity data from three randomized controlled trials, the Total Body Hypothermia for Neonatal Encephalopathy Trial (TOBY), National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), and CoolCap trials. Cost data inputs were informed by TOBY, the sole source of prospectively collected resource utilization data for encephalopathic infants. CE was expressed in terms of incremental cost per disability-free life year (DFLY) gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to generate CE acceptability curves (CEACs). RESULTS: Cooling led to a cost increase of £3787 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -2516, 12,360) (€5115; 95% CI: -3398-16,694; US$5344; 95% CI: -3598, 26,356; using 2006 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) purchasing power parities) and a DFLY gain of 0.19 (95%CI: 0.07-0.31) over the first 18 months after birth. The incremental cost per DFLY gained was £19,931 (€26,920; US$28,124). The baseline CEAC showed that if decision-makers are willing to pay £30,000 for an additional DFLY, there is a 69% probability that cooling is cost-effective. The probability of CE exceeded 99% at this threshold when the throughput of infants was increased to reflect the national incidence of neonatal encephalopathy or when the time horizon of the economic evaluation was extended to 18 years after birth. CONCLUSIONS: The probability that cooling is a cost-effective treatment for neonatal encephalopathy is finely balanced over the first 18 months after birth but increases substantially when national incidence data or an extended time horizon are considered.

Economic implications of home births and birth centers: a structured review.

BACKGROUND: It is widely perceived that home births and birth centers may help decrease the costs of maternity care for women with uncomplicated pregnancies and deliveries. This structured review examines the literature relating to the economic implications of home births and birth center care compared with hospital maternity care. METHODS: The bibliographic databases MEDLINE (from 1950), CINAHL (from 1982), EMBASE (from 1980), and an "in-house" database, Econ2, were searched for relevant English language publications using MeSH and free text terms. Data were extracted with respect to the study design, inclusion criteria, clinical and cost results, and details of what was included in the cost calculations. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included from the United Kingdom, United States, Australia, and Canada. Two studies focused on home births versus other forms and locations of care, whereas nine focused on birth centers versus other forms and locations of care. Resource use was generally lower for women cared for at home and in birth centers due to lower rates of intervention, shorter lengths of stay, or both. However, this fact did not always translate into lower costs because, in the U.K. where many studies were conducted, more midwives of a higher grade were employed to manage the birth centers than are usually employed in maternity units, and because of costs of converting existing facilities into delivery rooms. The quality of much of the literature was poor, although no studies were excluded for this reason. Selection bias was likely to be a problem in those studies not based on randomized controlled trials because, even where birth center eligibility was applied throughout, women who choose to deliver at home or in a birth center are likely to be different in terms of expectations and approach from women choosing to deliver in hospital. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the paucity of economic literature relating to home births and birth centers. Differences in results between studies may be attributed to differences in health care systems, differences in methods used, and differences in costs included. Further economic research that involves detailed bottom-up costing of alternative options for place of birth and measures multiple outcomes, including women's preferences, would help address the question of whether out-of-hospital birth is beneficial in economic terms.

Pushing the boundaries of viability: the economic impact of extreme preterm birth.

BACKGROUND: Previous assessments of the economic impact of preterm birth focussed on short term health service costs across the broad spectrum of prematurity. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the societal costs of extreme preterm birth during the sixth year after birth. METHODS: Unit costs were applied to estimates of health, social and broader resource use made by 241 children born at 20 through 25 completed weeks of gestation in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland and a comparison group of 160 children born at full term. Societal costs per child during the sixth year after birth were estimated and subjected to a rigorous sensitivity analysis. The effects of gestational age at birth on annual societal costs were analysed, first in a simple linear regression and then in a multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Mean societal costs over the 12 month period were 9541 pounds sterling (standard deviation 11,678 pounds sterling) for the extreme preterm group and 3883 pounds sterling (1098 pounds sterling) for the term group, generating a mean cost difference of 5658 pounds sterling (bootstrap 95% confidence interval: 4203 pounds sterling, 7256 pounds sterling) that was statistically significant (P<0.001). After adjustment for clinical and sociodemographic covariates, sex-specific extreme preterm birth was a strong predictor of high societal costs. CONCLUSION: The results of this study should facilitate the effective planning of services and may be used to inform the development of future economic evaluations of interventions aimed at preventing extreme preterm birth or alleviating its effects.

The impact of preterm birth on hospital inpatient admissions and costs during the first 5 years of life.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the cumulative use and cost of hospital inpatient services to 5 years of age by individuals divided into 4 subgroups by gestational age at birth. DESIGN: Costs applied to the hospital service utilization profile of each infant born in 2 areas covered by the Oxford Record Linkage Study during 1970-1993. SETTING: Oxfordshire and West Berkshire, southern United Kingdom. SUBJECTS: 239 694 individuals divided into 4 subgroups by gestational age at birth: <28 weeks, 28 to 31 weeks, 32 to 36 weeks, >or=37 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number and duration of hospital admissions during the first 5 years of life and costs, expressed in pound sterling and valued at 1998-1999 prices, of hospital inpatient services. RESULTS: The total duration of hospital admissions for infants born at <28 and at 28 to 31 gestational weeks was 85 and 16 times that for term infants, respectively, once duration of life had been taken into account. Hospital inpatient service costs were significantly higher for preterm infants than for term infants, with the cost differences persisting throughout infancy and early and mid-childhood. Over the first 5 years of life, the adjusted mean cost difference was estimated at pound 14,614 ( 22,798 US dollars) when infants born at <28 weeks gestational age were compared with term infants and pound 11,958 ( 18,654 US dollars) when infants born at 28 to 31 weeks gestational age were compared with term infants. Independent contributions to total cost came from being born: small for gestational age, a multiple, during the 1970s and early 1980s, to a woman of extreme maternal age or who was hospitalized antenatally, and from experiencing extended survival or childhood disease. However, preterm birth remained the strongest predictor of high cost. CONCLUSIONS: Preterm birth is a major predictor of how much an individual will cost hospital service providers during the first 5 years of life.

Preference-based approaches to measuring the benefits of perinatal care.

Studies that measure benefits of health care interventions in natural or physical units cannot incorporate the several health changes that might occur within a single measure, and they overlook individuals' preferences for those health changes. This paper discusses and critically appraises the application of preference-based approaches to the measurement of the benefits of perinatal care that have developed out of economic theory. These include quality adjusted life year (QALY)-based approaches, monetary-based approaches, and discrete choice experiments. QALY-based approaches use scaling techniques, such as the rating scale, standard gamble approach, and time trade-off approach, or multi-attribute utility measures, to measure the health-related quality of life weights of health states. Monetary-based approaches include the revealed preference approach, which involves observing decisions that individuals actually make concerning health risks, and the willingness-to-pay approach, which provides a framework for investigating individuals' willingness to pay for benefits of health care interventions. Discrete choice experiments describe health care interventions in terms of their attributes, and elicit preferences for scenarios that combine different levels of those attributes. Empirical examples are used to illustrate each preference-based approach to benefit measurement, and several methodological issues raised by the application of these approaches to the perinatal context are discussed. Particular attention is given to identifying the relevant attributes to incorporate into the measurement instrument, appropriate respondents for the measurement exercise, potential sources of bias in description and valuation processes, and the practicality, reliability, and validity of alternative measurement approaches. The paper's conclusion is that researchers should be explicit and rigorous in their application of preference-based approaches to benefit measurement in the context of perinatal care.

Antenatal ultrasound screening for fetal abnormalities: a systematic review of studies of cost and cost effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE: To review systematically and critically evidence to derive estimates of costs and cost effectiveness of routine ultrasound screening for fetal abnormalities. DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature using explicit criteria for inclusion of primary research studies, a stated electronic strategy to identify relevant material, and an explanation of why apparently relevant studies have not been included. SETTING: All countries of origin were included. The results of this review are important to obstetricians and to health service managers in the allocation of resources, and others who are considering conducting further research in this area. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Formal economic evaluations and cost studies of routine ultrasound screening. Costs of routine anomaly scans and costs of other procedures carried out as part of antenatal screening by ultrasound. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-nine studies were identified in total, 24 reaching the final stage of the review. Nine studies were formal economic evaluations and 15 reported costs studies or clinical effectiveness studies with some assessment of cost. The studies were carried out mainly in Europe and in the United States. After quality criteria were applied, data were extracted from six of the economic evaluations and six of the costs studies. One economic evaluation conducted alongside a randomised trial concluded that screening for fetal abnormalities by ultrasound in the second trimester was cost effective, compared with routine antenatal care. The costs of routine scans ranged from Pound Sterling 18 to Pound Sterling 204 and for non-routine ranged from Pound Sterling 32 to Pound Sterling 113. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of good quality primary studies of the costs of ultrasound screening in pregnancy. Typically, economic evaluations of ultrasound screening have been based on poor quality evidence of clinical effectiveness. There is a need for more published data on the costs and cost effectiveness of routine ultrasound screening for fetal anomalies, and of the longer term consequences of screening for anomalies.