Cost-Effectiveness of Neonatal Hearing Screening Programs: A Micro-Simulation Modeling Analysis
OBJECTIVES:Early detection of neonatal hearing impairment moderates the negative effects on speech and language development. Universal neonatal hearing screening protocols vary in tests used, timing of testing and the number of stages of screening. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of vari...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Ear and hearing 2021-07, Vol.42 (4), p.909-916 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 916 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 909 |
container_title | Ear and hearing |
container_volume | 42 |
creator | Verkleij, Mirjam L. Heijnsdijk, Eveline A.M. Bussé, Andrea M.L. Carr, Gwen Goedegebure, André Mackey, Allison R. Qirjazi, Birkena Uhlén, Inger M. Sloot, Frea Hoeve, Hans L.J. de Koning, Harry J. |
description | OBJECTIVES:Early detection of neonatal hearing impairment moderates the negative effects on speech and language development. Universal neonatal hearing screening protocols vary in tests used, timing of testing and the number of stages of screening. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of various protocols in the preparation of implementation of neonatal hearing screening in Albania.
DESIGN:A micro-simulation model was developed using input on demography, natural history of neonatal hearing impairment, screening characteristics and treatment. Parameter values were derived from a review of the literature and expert opinion. We simulated multiple protocols using otoacoustic emissions (OAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (aABR), varying the test type, timing and number of stages. Cost-effectiveness was analyzed over a life-time horizon.
RESULTS:The two best protocols for well infants were OAE followed by aABR (i.e., two-stage OAE-aABR) testing in the maternity ward and single-aABR testing. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were 4181 and 78,077 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, respectively. Single-aABR screening led to more cases being detected compared to a two-stage screening program. However, it also resulted in higher referral rates, which increased the total costs of diagnostics. Multi-staged screening decreased referral rates but may increase the number of missed cases due to false-negative test results and nonattendance.
CONCLUSIONS:Only the 2-stage OAE-aABR (maternity ward) protocol was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of 10,413 for Albania, as suggested by the World Health Organization, and was found to be cost-effective. This study is among the few to assess neonatal hearing screening programs over a life-time horizon and the first to predict the cost-effectiveness of multiple screening scenarios. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000981 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_D8T</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_swepub_primary_oai_swepub_ki_se_465923</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2470898517</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5401-aa4c410977e2283dcb8eadaf01e40556bcf2ed0ed4ba5290ef6040468f3c24e53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkV1vFCEUhidGY2v1Hxgzl95Q-Z4ZL0w2a7UmrZrUXhOWOexiGagw003_vUx2bbZeKAnhwHneFw6nql4TfEpw17xbXH88xYeja8mT6pgI1iIuZfP0ID6qXuT8E2NCO8mfV0eMMSwFb44rtYx5RGfWghndHQTIuY62_gox6FH7-hx0cmFdX5kEEOboe4rrpIf8vl7Ul86kiK7cMHk9uhjqy9iDn6lF0P4-u_yyema1z_Bqv55U15_OfizP0cW3z1-WiwtkBMcEac0Nn8tqgNKW9WbVgu61xQQ4FkKujKXQY-j5SgvaYbASc8xla5mhHAQ7qdDON2_hdlqp2-QGne5V1E7tj25KBIpL0VFW-A87vmQG6A2EMWn_SPY4E9xGreOdaiklDZHF4O3eIMVfE-RRDS4b8F4HiFNWlDe47VpBmoLyHVo-K-cE9uEagtVctCq9VH_3ssjeHD7xQfSneQVod8A2-hFSvvHTFpLagPbj5n_e_B_SmWKcS0QxJbgpO1Qm4ew3jXa85w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2470898517</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cost-Effectiveness of Neonatal Hearing Screening Programs: A Micro-Simulation Modeling Analysis</title><source>SWEPUB Freely available online</source><creator>Verkleij, Mirjam L. ; Heijnsdijk, Eveline A.M. ; Bussé, Andrea M.L. ; Carr, Gwen ; Goedegebure, André ; Mackey, Allison R. ; Qirjazi, Birkena ; Uhlén, Inger M. ; Sloot, Frea ; Hoeve, Hans L.J. ; de Koning, Harry J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Verkleij, Mirjam L. ; Heijnsdijk, Eveline A.M. ; Bussé, Andrea M.L. ; Carr, Gwen ; Goedegebure, André ; Mackey, Allison R. ; Qirjazi, Birkena ; Uhlén, Inger M. ; Sloot, Frea ; Hoeve, Hans L.J. ; de Koning, Harry J. ; Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of EUSCREEN Study Consortium ; on behalf of Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of EUSCREEN Study Consortium</creatorcontrib><description>OBJECTIVES:Early detection of neonatal hearing impairment moderates the negative effects on speech and language development. Universal neonatal hearing screening protocols vary in tests used, timing of testing and the number of stages of screening. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of various protocols in the preparation of implementation of neonatal hearing screening in Albania.
DESIGN:A micro-simulation model was developed using input on demography, natural history of neonatal hearing impairment, screening characteristics and treatment. Parameter values were derived from a review of the literature and expert opinion. We simulated multiple protocols using otoacoustic emissions (OAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (aABR), varying the test type, timing and number of stages. Cost-effectiveness was analyzed over a life-time horizon.
RESULTS:The two best protocols for well infants were OAE followed by aABR (i.e., two-stage OAE-aABR) testing in the maternity ward and single-aABR testing. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were 4181 and 78,077 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, respectively. Single-aABR screening led to more cases being detected compared to a two-stage screening program. However, it also resulted in higher referral rates, which increased the total costs of diagnostics. Multi-staged screening decreased referral rates but may increase the number of missed cases due to false-negative test results and nonattendance.
CONCLUSIONS:Only the 2-stage OAE-aABR (maternity ward) protocol was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of 10,413 for Albania, as suggested by the World Health Organization, and was found to be cost-effective. This study is among the few to assess neonatal hearing screening programs over a life-time horizon and the first to predict the cost-effectiveness of multiple screening scenarios.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1538-4667</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 0196-0202</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1538-4667</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000981</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33306547</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</publisher><subject>Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem ; Hearing Tests ; Humans ; Infant, Newborn ; Neonatal Screening ; Otoacoustic Emissions, Spontaneous</subject><ispartof>Ear and hearing, 2021-07, Vol.42 (4), p.909-916</ispartof><rights>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Ear & Hearing is published on behalf of the American Auditory Society, by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Ear & Hearing is published on behalf of the American Auditory Society, by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5401-aa4c410977e2283dcb8eadaf01e40556bcf2ed0ed4ba5290ef6040468f3c24e53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5401-aa4c410977e2283dcb8eadaf01e40556bcf2ed0ed4ba5290ef6040468f3c24e53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,550,776,881</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttp://kipublications.ki.se/Default.aspx?queryparsed=id:146946653$$EView_record_in_Swedish_Publication_Index_(SWEPUB)$$FView_record_in_$$GSwedish_Publication_Index_(SWEPUB)$$Hfree_for_read</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33306547$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://kipublications.ki.se/Default.aspx?queryparsed=id:146946653$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Verkleij, Mirjam L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heijnsdijk, Eveline A.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bussé, Andrea M.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carr, Gwen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goedegebure, André</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mackey, Allison R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qirjazi, Birkena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uhlén, Inger M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sloot, Frea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoeve, Hans L.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Koning, Harry J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of EUSCREEN Study Consortium</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>on behalf of Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of EUSCREEN Study Consortium</creatorcontrib><title>Cost-Effectiveness of Neonatal Hearing Screening Programs: A Micro-Simulation Modeling Analysis</title><title>Ear and hearing</title><addtitle>Ear Hear</addtitle><description>OBJECTIVES:Early detection of neonatal hearing impairment moderates the negative effects on speech and language development. Universal neonatal hearing screening protocols vary in tests used, timing of testing and the number of stages of screening. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of various protocols in the preparation of implementation of neonatal hearing screening in Albania.
DESIGN:A micro-simulation model was developed using input on demography, natural history of neonatal hearing impairment, screening characteristics and treatment. Parameter values were derived from a review of the literature and expert opinion. We simulated multiple protocols using otoacoustic emissions (OAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (aABR), varying the test type, timing and number of stages. Cost-effectiveness was analyzed over a life-time horizon.
RESULTS:The two best protocols for well infants were OAE followed by aABR (i.e., two-stage OAE-aABR) testing in the maternity ward and single-aABR testing. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were 4181 and 78,077 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, respectively. Single-aABR screening led to more cases being detected compared to a two-stage screening program. However, it also resulted in higher referral rates, which increased the total costs of diagnostics. Multi-staged screening decreased referral rates but may increase the number of missed cases due to false-negative test results and nonattendance.
CONCLUSIONS:Only the 2-stage OAE-aABR (maternity ward) protocol was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of 10,413 for Albania, as suggested by the World Health Organization, and was found to be cost-effective. This study is among the few to assess neonatal hearing screening programs over a life-time horizon and the first to predict the cost-effectiveness of multiple screening scenarios.</description><subject>Cost-Benefit Analysis</subject><subject>Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem</subject><subject>Hearing Tests</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infant, Newborn</subject><subject>Neonatal Screening</subject><subject>Otoacoustic Emissions, Spontaneous</subject><issn>1538-4667</issn><issn>0196-0202</issn><issn>1538-4667</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>D8T</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkV1vFCEUhidGY2v1Hxgzl95Q-Z4ZL0w2a7UmrZrUXhOWOexiGagw003_vUx2bbZeKAnhwHneFw6nql4TfEpw17xbXH88xYeja8mT6pgI1iIuZfP0ID6qXuT8E2NCO8mfV0eMMSwFb44rtYx5RGfWghndHQTIuY62_gox6FH7-hx0cmFdX5kEEOboe4rrpIf8vl7Ul86kiK7cMHk9uhjqy9iDn6lF0P4-u_yyema1z_Bqv55U15_OfizP0cW3z1-WiwtkBMcEac0Nn8tqgNKW9WbVgu61xQQ4FkKujKXQY-j5SgvaYbASc8xla5mhHAQ7qdDON2_hdlqp2-QGne5V1E7tj25KBIpL0VFW-A87vmQG6A2EMWn_SPY4E9xGreOdaiklDZHF4O3eIMVfE-RRDS4b8F4HiFNWlDe47VpBmoLyHVo-K-cE9uEagtVctCq9VH_3ssjeHD7xQfSneQVod8A2-hFSvvHTFpLagPbj5n_e_B_SmWKcS0QxJbgpO1Qm4ew3jXa85w</recordid><startdate>202107</startdate><enddate>202107</enddate><creator>Verkleij, Mirjam L.</creator><creator>Heijnsdijk, Eveline A.M.</creator><creator>Bussé, Andrea M.L.</creator><creator>Carr, Gwen</creator><creator>Goedegebure, André</creator><creator>Mackey, Allison R.</creator><creator>Qirjazi, Birkena</creator><creator>Uhlén, Inger M.</creator><creator>Sloot, Frea</creator><creator>Hoeve, Hans L.J.</creator><creator>de Koning, Harry J.</creator><general>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</general><general>Copyright Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>ADTPV</scope><scope>AOWAS</scope><scope>D8T</scope><scope>ZZAVC</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202107</creationdate><title>Cost-Effectiveness of Neonatal Hearing Screening Programs: A Micro-Simulation Modeling Analysis</title><author>Verkleij, Mirjam L. ; Heijnsdijk, Eveline A.M. ; Bussé, Andrea M.L. ; Carr, Gwen ; Goedegebure, André ; Mackey, Allison R. ; Qirjazi, Birkena ; Uhlén, Inger M. ; Sloot, Frea ; Hoeve, Hans L.J. ; de Koning, Harry J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5401-aa4c410977e2283dcb8eadaf01e40556bcf2ed0ed4ba5290ef6040468f3c24e53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Cost-Benefit Analysis</topic><topic>Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem</topic><topic>Hearing Tests</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infant, Newborn</topic><topic>Neonatal Screening</topic><topic>Otoacoustic Emissions, Spontaneous</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Verkleij, Mirjam L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heijnsdijk, Eveline A.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bussé, Andrea M.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carr, Gwen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goedegebure, André</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mackey, Allison R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qirjazi, Birkena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uhlén, Inger M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sloot, Frea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoeve, Hans L.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Koning, Harry J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of EUSCREEN Study Consortium</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>on behalf of Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of EUSCREEN Study Consortium</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>SwePub</collection><collection>SwePub Articles</collection><collection>SWEPUB Freely available online</collection><collection>SwePub Articles full text</collection><jtitle>Ear and hearing</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Verkleij, Mirjam L.</au><au>Heijnsdijk, Eveline A.M.</au><au>Bussé, Andrea M.L.</au><au>Carr, Gwen</au><au>Goedegebure, André</au><au>Mackey, Allison R.</au><au>Qirjazi, Birkena</au><au>Uhlén, Inger M.</au><au>Sloot, Frea</au><au>Hoeve, Hans L.J.</au><au>de Koning, Harry J.</au><aucorp>Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of EUSCREEN Study Consortium</aucorp><aucorp>on behalf of Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of EUSCREEN Study Consortium</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cost-Effectiveness of Neonatal Hearing Screening Programs: A Micro-Simulation Modeling Analysis</atitle><jtitle>Ear and hearing</jtitle><addtitle>Ear Hear</addtitle><date>2021-07</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>909</spage><epage>916</epage><pages>909-916</pages><issn>1538-4667</issn><issn>0196-0202</issn><eissn>1538-4667</eissn><abstract>OBJECTIVES:Early detection of neonatal hearing impairment moderates the negative effects on speech and language development. Universal neonatal hearing screening protocols vary in tests used, timing of testing and the number of stages of screening. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of various protocols in the preparation of implementation of neonatal hearing screening in Albania.
DESIGN:A micro-simulation model was developed using input on demography, natural history of neonatal hearing impairment, screening characteristics and treatment. Parameter values were derived from a review of the literature and expert opinion. We simulated multiple protocols using otoacoustic emissions (OAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (aABR), varying the test type, timing and number of stages. Cost-effectiveness was analyzed over a life-time horizon.
RESULTS:The two best protocols for well infants were OAE followed by aABR (i.e., two-stage OAE-aABR) testing in the maternity ward and single-aABR testing. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were 4181 and 78,077 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, respectively. Single-aABR screening led to more cases being detected compared to a two-stage screening program. However, it also resulted in higher referral rates, which increased the total costs of diagnostics. Multi-staged screening decreased referral rates but may increase the number of missed cases due to false-negative test results and nonattendance.
CONCLUSIONS:Only the 2-stage OAE-aABR (maternity ward) protocol was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of 10,413 for Albania, as suggested by the World Health Organization, and was found to be cost-effective. This study is among the few to assess neonatal hearing screening programs over a life-time horizon and the first to predict the cost-effectiveness of multiple screening scenarios.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</pub><pmid>33306547</pmid><doi>10.1097/AUD.0000000000000981</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
identifier | ISSN: 1538-4667 |
ispartof | Ear and hearing, 2021-07, Vol.42 (4), p.909-916 |
issn | 1538-4667 0196-0202 1538-4667 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_swepub_primary_oai_swepub_ki_se_465923 |
source | SWEPUB Freely available online |
subjects | Cost-Benefit Analysis Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem Hearing Tests Humans Infant, Newborn Neonatal Screening Otoacoustic Emissions, Spontaneous |
title | Cost-Effectiveness of Neonatal Hearing Screening Programs: A Micro-Simulation Modeling Analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T16%3A01%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_D8T&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cost-Effectiveness%20of%20Neonatal%20Hearing%20Screening%20Programs:%20A%20Micro-Simulation%20Modeling%20Analysis&rft.jtitle=Ear%20and%20hearing&rft.au=Verkleij,%20Mirjam%20L.&rft.aucorp=Country-Committees%20Joint-Partnership%20of%20EUSCREEN%20Study%20Consortium&rft.date=2021-07&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=909&rft.epage=916&rft.pages=909-916&rft.issn=1538-4667&rft.eissn=1538-4667&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000981&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_D8T%3E2470898517%3C/proquest_D8T%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2470898517&rft_id=info:pmid/33306547&rfr_iscdi=true |