Economic evaluation of elective single-embryo transfer with subsequent single frozen embryo transfer in an in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection program.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the cost-effectiveness of IVF-ICSI cycles with elective single-embryo transfer (eSET), plus elective single frozen embryo transfer (eSFET) if pregnancy is not achieved, compared with double-embryo transfer (DET). DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING: Public hospital. PATIENT(S): A population of 121 women (<38 years old), undergoing their first or second IVF cycles. INTERVENTION(S): We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis using the results of a prospective clinical trial. The women in group 1 received eSET plus eSFET, and those in group 2 received DET. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Live birth delivery rate. RESULT(S): The cumulative live birth delivery rate was 38.60% in the eSET+eSFET group versus 42.19% in the DET group. The mean costs per patient were €5,614.11 in the eSET+eSFET group and €5,562.29 in the DET group. These differences were not statistically significant. The rate of multiple gestation was significantly lower in the eSET group than in the DET group (0 vs. 25.9%). CONCLUSION(S): This study does not show that eSET is superior to DET in terms of effectiveness or of costs. The lack of superiority of the results for the eSET+eSFET and the DET groups corroborates that the choice of strategy to be adopted should be determined by the context of the health care system and the individual prognosis.

Diagnostic accuracy, effectiveness and cost for cognitive impairment and dementia screening of three short cognitive tests applicable to illiterates.

BACKGROUND: Illiteracy, a universal problem, limits the utilization of the most widely used short cognitive tests. Our objective was to assess and compare the effectiveness and cost for cognitive impairment (CI) and dementia (DEM) screening of three short cognitive tests applicable to illiterates. METHODS: Phase III diagnostic test evaluation study was performed during one year in four Primary Care centers, prospectively including individuals with suspicion of CI or DEM. All underwent the Eurotest, Memory Alteration Test (M@T), and Phototest, applied in a balanced manner. Clinical, functional, and cognitive studies were independently performed in a blinded fashion in a Cognitive Behavioral Neurology Unit, and the gold standard diagnosis was established by consensus of expert neurologists on the basis of these results. Effectiveness of tests was assessed as the proportion of correct diagnoses (diagnostic accuracy [DA]) and the kappa index of concordance (k) with respect to gold standard diagnoses. Costs were based on public prices at the time and hospital accounts. RESULTS: The study included 139 individuals: 47 with DEM, 36 with CI, and 56 without CI. No significant differences in effectiveness were found among the tests. For DEM screening: Eurotest (k = 0.71 [0.59-0.83], DA = 0.87 [0.80-0.92]), M@T (k = 0.72 [0.60-0.84], DA = 0.87 [0.80-0.92]), Phototest (k = 0.70 [0.57-0.82], DA = 0.86 [0.79-0.91]). For CI screening: Eurotest (k = 0.67 [0.55-0.79]; DA = 0.83 [0.76-0.89]), M@T (k = 0.52 [0.37-0.67]; DA = 0.80 [0.72-0.86]), Phototest (k = 0.59 [0.46-0.72]; DA = 0.79 [0.71-0.86]). There were no differences in the cost of DEM screening, but the cost of CI screening was significantly higher with M@T (330.7 ± 177.1 €, mean ± sd) than with Eurotest (294.1 ± 195.0 €) or Phototest (296.0 ± 196. 5 €). Application time was shorter with Phototest (2.8 ± 0.8 min) than with Eurotest (7.1 ± 1.8 min) or M@T (6.8 ± 2.2 min). CONCLUSIONS: Eurotest, M@T, and Phototest are equally effective. Eurotest and Phototest are both less expensive options but Phototest is the most efficient, requiring the shortest application time.

Effectiveness and costs of phototest in dementia and cognitive impairment screening.

BACKGROUND: To assess and compare the effectiveness and costs of Phototest, Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), and Memory Impairment Screen (MIS) to screen for dementia (DEM) and cognitive impairment (CI). METHODS: A phase III study was conducted over one year in consecutive patients with suspicion of CI or DEM at four Primary Care (PC) centers. After undergoing all screening tests at the PC center, participants were extensively evaluated by researchers blinded to screening test results in a Cognitive-Behavioral Neurology Unit (CBNU). The gold standard diagnosis was established by consensus of expert neurologists. Effectiveness was assessed by the proportion of correct diagnoses (diagnostic accuracy [DA]) and by the kappa index of concordance between test results and gold standard diagnoses. Costs were based on public prices and hospital accounts. RESULTS: The study included 140 subjects (48 with DEM, 37 with CI without DEM, and 55 without CI). The MIS could not be applied to 23 illiterate subjects (16.4%). For DEM, the maximum effectiveness of the MMSE was obtained with different cutoff points as a function of educational level [k = 0.31 (95% Confidence interval [95%CI], 0.19-0.43), DA = 0.60 (95%CI, 0.52-0.68)], and that of the MIS with a cutoff of 3/4 [k = 0.63 (95%CI, 0.48-0.78), DA = 0.83 (95%CI, 0.80-0.92)]. Effectiveness of the Phototest [k = 0.71 (95%CI, 0.59-0.83), DA = 0.87 (95%CI, 0.80-0.92)] was similar to that of the MIS and higher than that of the MMSE. Costs were higher with MMSE (275.9 ± 193.3€ [mean ± sd euros]) than with Phototest (208.2 ± 196.8€) or MIS (201.3 ± 193.4€), whose costs did not significantly differ. For CI, the effectiveness did not significantly differ between MIS [k = 0.59 (95%CI, 0.45-0.74), DA = 0.79 (95%CI, 0.64-0.97)] and Phototest [k = 0.58 (95%CI, 0.45-0.74), DA = 0.78 (95%CI, 0.64-0.95)] and was lowest for the MMSE [k = 0.27 (95%CI, 0.09-0.45), DA = 0.69 (95%CI, 0.56-0.84)]. Costs were higher for MMSE (393.4 ± 121.8€) than for Phototest (287.0 ± 197.4€) or MIS (300.1 ± 165.6€), whose costs did not significantly differ. CONCLUSION: MMSE is not an effective instrument in our setting. For both DEM and CI, the Phototest and MIS are more effective and less costly, with no difference between them. However, MIS could not be applied to the appreciable percentage of our population who were illiterate.

[Validation of the short version of the Woman Abuse Screening Tool for use in primary care in Spain]. / Validación de la versión corta del Woman Abuse Screening Tool para su uso en atención primaria en España.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the criterion validity of the Spanish short version of the Woman Abuse Screening Tool (WAST) to identify battered women among those attending primary health care services in Spain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study in two primary care centers in Granada. A total of 390 women between 18 and 70 years old were studied. The Index of Spouse Abuse (ISA) was used as the gold standard. RESULTS: Two score criteria were used. Using the first criterion, 132 women (33.8%) scored positively. The sensitivity was 91.4%, specificity was 76.2%, positive predictive value 40.2% and negative predictive value was 98.1%. Five women with a negative WAST score obtained a positive ISA score (false negatives). Seventy-nine women obtained a positive score in the WAST, with a negative score in the ISA (false positives). CONCLUSIONS: These results coincide with the sensitivity and specificity values obtained in the validation of the instrument in Spanish-speaking women in the USA, which also recommend the use of the first criterion. The Spanish short version of the WAST is a suitable instrument to be used by health professionals for the early detection of gender violence in the healthcare context of Spain. However, because of its low specificity, this instrument should be used with caution.

Cost-outcome analysis of joint replacement: evidence from a Spanish public hospital.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Efficiency-based healthcare decision-making has been widely accepted for some time, with cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) as the main outcome measure. Nevertheless, for numerous medical procedures, little data are available on the cost per QALY gained. The aim of the present study was to calculate the cost per QALY gained with primary hip and knee replacement and to compare the result with the cost per QALY for other medical procedures, as well as with the maximum threshold cost considered acceptable in Spain. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort pre-test/post-test study of patients undergoing primary hip or knee arthroplasty. Age, sex, and clinical variables were recorded. Functional status and quality of life were measured by means of the WOMAC and EuroQol instruments, respectively, before the intervention and 6 months later. The direct costs of the intervention were calculated, with length of hospital stay and the prosthesis as the main cost drivers. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients, 40 from each intervention, were included in this study. Both functional and perceived health status improved after the intervention. The number of QALYs gained in the knee cohort was 4.64, while that in the hip cohort was 0.86. The total cost of knee replacement was lower (6,865.52 euro) than that of hip replacement (7,891.21 euro). The cost per QALY gained was 1,275.84 euro and 7,936.12 euro for knee and hip interventions, respectively. The calculations performed included a 6% discount rate for health outcomes, a 3% inflation rate for costs, and a success rate of 95% at 15 years. CONCLUSIONS: The costs of both knee and hip replacement were lower than the threshold of 30,000 euro per QALY considered acceptable in Spain, and compared favorably with other medical and surgical procedures.

[Cost of assisted reproduction technology in a public hospital]. / Coste de las técnicas de reproducción asistida en un hospital público.

OBJECTIVES: Most studies on the costs of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) identify the total cost of the procedure with the direct cost, without considering important items such as overhead or intermediate costs. The objective of this study was to determine the cost per ART procedure in a public hospital in 2003 and to compare the results with those in the same hospital in 1998. METHODS: Data from the Human Reproduction Unit of the Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital in Granada (Spain) from 1998 and 2003 were analyzed. Since the total costs of the unit were known, the cost of the distinct ART procedures performed in the hospital was calculated by means of a methodology for cost distribution. RESULTS: Between 1998 and 2003, the activity and costs of the Human Reproduction Unit analyzed evolved differently. Analysis of activity showed that some techniques, such as intracytoplasmic sperm injection, were consolidated while others, such as stimulation without assisted reproduction or intracervical insemination were abandoned. In all procedures, unit costs per cycle and per delivery decreased in the period analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: Important changes took place in the structure of costs of ART in the Human Reproduction Unit of the Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital between 1998 and 2003. Some techniques were discontinued, while others gained importance. Technological advances and structural innovations, together with a "learning effect," modified the structure of ART-related costs.