Optimizing Fetal Aneuploidy Screening in an Austere Military Clinical Environment: A Prenatal Cost Comparison

ABSTRACT Introduction Austere clinical settings, including remote military installations, face unique challenges in screening pregnant women for aneuploidy. The objective of this study was to compare the direct and indirect prenatal costs of traditional 2-part serum-based screening to cell-free DNA...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Military medicine 2021-03, Vol.186 (3-4), p.e410-e414
Hauptverfasser: Burrus, Ashton D, Shaw-Williams, Michelle M, Thagard, Andrew S
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:ABSTRACT Introduction Austere clinical settings, including remote military installations, face unique challenges in screening pregnant women for aneuploidy. The objective of this study was to compare the direct and indirect prenatal costs of traditional 2-part serum-based screening to cell-free DNA (cfDNA) for detection of trisomies 18 and 21 for a military treatment facility with limited in-house perinatal resources. Materials and Methods We identified Naval Hospital Guantanamo Bay as a surrogate for an austere clinical environment. A prenatal cost of care analysis incorporating direct and indirect expenses was performed to compare the 2 aneuploidy screening strategies for a theoretical cohort of 100 patients for detection of trisomies 18 and 21. The baseline aneuploidy uptake rate was determined using a historical cohort. Test performance characteristics were obtained from the contracting laboratory. Aneuploidy rates and costs were calculated using previously published data. Results Assuming a baseline screen uptake rate of 87%, initial screening using the traditional approach would directly cost $8,285.01 versus $44,140.32 with cfDNA. Considering indirect costs such as travel, consultative services, evaluation and follow-up testing of an abnormal screen result, and lost productivity, the cost difference narrows to $14,458.25 over a 5- to 6-year period. Cost equivalence is achieved when cfDNA is priced at $341.17 per test. Conclusion Cell-free DNA as an initial screening strategy offers enhanced detection rates for trisomies 18 and 21 but remains more costly than traditional screening when incorporating direct and indirect expenses. In a low volume setting with limited resources, the added cost may be justified given the implications of unrecognized aneuploidy.
ISSN:0026-4075
1930-613X
DOI:10.1093/milmed/usaa375