{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.041537507749535026, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02541847489150651, 'mean_word_length': 5.354330708661418, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cost‐Minimization Analyses of Domiciliary Antenatal Fetal Monitoring in High‐Risk Pregnancies

Objective To comare safety and cost-effectiveness of domiciliary antenatal fetal monitoring (cardiotocography and obstetric surveillance) with in-hospital monitoring in high-risk pregnancies. Methods From September 1992 to June 1994, 150 consecutive women with high-risk pregnancies, who would other wise be monitored in the hospital, entered a randomized controlled trial of in-hospital (n = 76) monitoring. The main outcome measures were neonatal safety (Prechtl neurologic optimality score, the proportion of non-optimals) and cost-effectiveness. To test a two-point defference in mean Prechtl scores (two-tailed α = .05, 1-β = .80), 150 women were needed. Safety and cost-effectiveness were analyzed according to intention to treat. Conditional on the safety outcomes, a cost-minimization analyses based on actual resource use was performed. Uncertainty of results was explored by sensitivity analyses. Results Neonatal outcomes were equal. No cost-shifting between the antenatal and psotpartum period occurred. Substituting domiciliary for in-hospital monitoring reduced mean (standard deviation) antenatal costs from $3558 ($2841) to $1521 ($1459) per woman (P < .01). If costs were varied by the addition of 50%, costs were still reduced. The magnitude of the reduction was sensitive to the costs of domiciliary monitoring. Conclusion Domiciliary monitaring is safe and reduces costs by one-half. The technique seems transferable to other settings but local circumstances may sometimes hamper its dissemination.