First trimester screening for pre-eclampsia and targeted aspirin prophylaxis: a cost-effectiveness cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Investigate cost-effectiveness of first trimester pre-eclampsia screening using the Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) algorithm and targeted aspirin prophylaxis in comparison with standard care. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: London tertiary hospital. POPULATION: 5957 pregnancies screened for pre-eclampsia using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) method. METHODS: Differences in pregnancy outcomes between those who developed pre-eclampsia, term pre-eclampsia and preterm pre-eclampsia were compared by the Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-square tests. The FMF algorithm was applied retrospectively to the cohort. A decision analytic model was used to estimate costs and outcomes for pregnancies screened using NICE and those screened using the FMF algorithm. The decision point probabilities were calculated using the included cohort. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental healthcare costs and QALY gained per pregnancy screened. RESULTS: Of 5957 pregnancies, 12.8% and 15.9% were screen-positive for development of pre-eclampsia using the NICE and FMF methods, respectively. Of those who were screen-positive by NICE recommendations, aspirin was not prescribed in 25%. Across the three groups, namely, pregnancies without pre-eclampsia, term pre-eclampsia and preterm pre-eclampsia there was a statistically significant trend in rates of emergency caesarean (respectively 21%, 43% and 71.4%; P < 0.001), admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) (5.9%, 9.4%, 41%; P < 0.001) and length of stay in NICU. The FMF algorithm was associated with seven fewer cases of preterm pre-eclampsia, cost saving of £9.06 and QALY gain of 0.00006/pregnancy screened. CONCLUSIONS: Using a conservative approach, application of the FMF algorithm achieved clinical benefit and an economic cost saving.

The impact of digital healthcare on vulnerable pregnant women: A review of the use of the MyCare app in the maternity department at a central London tertiary unit.

Introduction: Digitalisation offers innovative solutions within maternity services; however, vulnerable groups risk being overlooked. University College London Hospital's (UCLH) successful implementation of a digital maternity app, MyCare, gives women access to test results, information about appointments, and enables communication with healthcare professionals (HCPs). Yet, little is known about access and engagement among vulnerable pregnant women. Methodology: Research was conducted over a 3-month period (April-June 2022) in the Maternity Department at UCLH, UK. MyCare datasets were analysed, and anonymised surveys completed by vulnerable pregnant women and HCPs. Results: Lower rates of utilisation and engagement with MyCare were seen in vulnerable pregnant women especially among refugee/asylum seekers, those with mental health issues, and those facing domestic violence. Non-users were also more likely to be individuals from ethnic minority backgrounds, with a lower average social-deprivation-index decile, whose first language was not English, and with a significant history of non-attendance to appointments. Patient and HCP surveys highlighted various barriers to MyCare engagement, including a lack of motivation, limited language options, low e-literacy levels, and complex app interfaces. Conclusion: The use of a single digital tool, without a formulated pathway to identify and assist those not accessing or engaging with it, risks unequal care provision which may exacerbate health inequalities. This research advances the idea that digital exclusion is not necessarily a matter of access to technology, but an issue of a lack of engagement with these tools. Therefore, vulnerable women and HCPs must be integral to the implementation of digital strategies, to ensure no one is left behind.