Prevention of Postpartum Haemorrhage: Economic evaluation of the novel Butterfly device in a UK setting
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
Electronic versions
Documents
- PIIS0301211523000799
Final published version, 4.11 MB, PDF document
Licence: CC BY-NC-ND Show licence
DOI
Objectives
To explore the cost-effectiveness of a novel PPH device as compared with usual care.
Design
A decision analytical model was used to explore the cost-effectiveness of the PPH Butterfly device compared with usual care. This was part of a United Kingdom, UK, clinical trial ISRCTN15452399 using a matched historical cohort who had standard PPH management without the use of the PPH Butterfly device. The economic evaluation was conducted from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective.
Setting
Liverpool Women’s Hospital, UK.
Participants
57 women with 113 matched controls.
Intervention
The PPH Butterfly is a novel device that has been invented and developed in the UK to facilitate bimanual compression of the uterus in the treatment of PPH.
Main outcome measures
Main outcome measures included healthcare costs, blood loss, and maternal morbidity events.
Results
Mean treatment costs in the Butterfly cohort were £3,459.66 as compared with standard care £3,223.93. Treatment with the Butterfly device resulted in decreased total blood loss in comparison with standard care. The Butterfly device had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £3,795.78 per PPH progression avoided (defined as ≤ 1000 ml additional blood loss from device insertion point). If the NHS is prepared to pay £8,500 per PPH progression avoided, then the Butterfly device is cost-effective with a probability of 87 percent. In the PPH Butterfly treatment arm there were 9% fewer cases of massive obstetric haemorrhage (severe PPH of more than 2000mls or more than 4 units of blood transfusion required) recorded as compared with the standard care historical cohort. As a low-cost device, the PPH Butterfly device is cost-effective but can be cost-saving to the NHS.
Conclusion
The PPH pathway can result in high-cost resource use such as blood transfusion or high dependence unit hospital stays. The Butterfly device is a relative low-cost device in a UK NHS setting with a high probability of being cost-effective. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) can use this evidence in considering the adoption of innovative technologies such as the Butterfly device in the NHS. Extrapolation on an international scale to lower and middle-income countries could prevent mortality associated with PPH.
To explore the cost-effectiveness of a novel PPH device as compared with usual care.
Design
A decision analytical model was used to explore the cost-effectiveness of the PPH Butterfly device compared with usual care. This was part of a United Kingdom, UK, clinical trial ISRCTN15452399 using a matched historical cohort who had standard PPH management without the use of the PPH Butterfly device. The economic evaluation was conducted from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective.
Setting
Liverpool Women’s Hospital, UK.
Participants
57 women with 113 matched controls.
Intervention
The PPH Butterfly is a novel device that has been invented and developed in the UK to facilitate bimanual compression of the uterus in the treatment of PPH.
Main outcome measures
Main outcome measures included healthcare costs, blood loss, and maternal morbidity events.
Results
Mean treatment costs in the Butterfly cohort were £3,459.66 as compared with standard care £3,223.93. Treatment with the Butterfly device resulted in decreased total blood loss in comparison with standard care. The Butterfly device had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £3,795.78 per PPH progression avoided (defined as ≤ 1000 ml additional blood loss from device insertion point). If the NHS is prepared to pay £8,500 per PPH progression avoided, then the Butterfly device is cost-effective with a probability of 87 percent. In the PPH Butterfly treatment arm there were 9% fewer cases of massive obstetric haemorrhage (severe PPH of more than 2000mls or more than 4 units of blood transfusion required) recorded as compared with the standard care historical cohort. As a low-cost device, the PPH Butterfly device is cost-effective but can be cost-saving to the NHS.
Conclusion
The PPH pathway can result in high-cost resource use such as blood transfusion or high dependence unit hospital stays. The Butterfly device is a relative low-cost device in a UK NHS setting with a high probability of being cost-effective. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) can use this evidence in considering the adoption of innovative technologies such as the Butterfly device in the NHS. Extrapolation on an international scale to lower and middle-income countries could prevent mortality associated with PPH.
Keywords
- Cost-effectiveness, Decision modelling, Decision trees, Medical device pricing, Postpartum haemorrhage, Butterfly device, Women, Childbirth, Health Economics
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 149-157 |
Journal | European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology |
Volume | 283 |
Early online date | 4 Mar 2023 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Apr 2023 |
Total downloads
No data available