Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 27
Filter
1.
Contraception ; 136: 110468, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38648923

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost of Rhesus (Rh) testing and prophylaxis for first-trimester vaginal bleeding in the ambulatory setting. STUDY DESIGN: We used time-driven, activity-based costing to analyze tasks associated with Rh testing and prophylaxis of first-trimester vaginal bleeding at one hospital-based outpatient and two independent reproductive health clinics. At each site, we observed 10 patients undergoing Rh-typing and two patients undergoing Rh prophylaxis. We computed the costs of blood Rh-typing by both fingerstick and phlebotomy, cost of locating previous blood type in the electronic health record (available for 69.8% of hospital-based patients), and costs associated with Rh immune globulin prophylaxis. All costs are reported in 2021 US dollars. RESULTS: The hospital-based clinic reviewed the electronic health record to confirm Rh-status (cost, $26.18 per patient) and performed a phlebotomy, at $47.11 per patient, if none was recorded. The independent clinics typed blood by fingerstick, at a per-patient cost of $4.07. Rh-immune globulin administration costs, including the medication, were similar across facilities, at a mean of $145.66 per patient. Projected yearly costs for testing and prophylaxis were $55,831 for the hospital-based clinic, which was the lowest-volume site, $47,941 for Clinic A, which saw 150 patients/month, and $185,654 for Clinic B, which saw 600 patients/month. CONCLUSIONS: Rh testing and prophylaxis for first-trimester vaginal bleeding generates considerable costs for outpatient facilities, even for Rh-positive patients with a prior blood type on record. IMPLICATIONS: Rh testing and prophylaxis for first-trimester bleeding generate considerable costs even for Rh-positive patients and those with a previously known blood type. These findings highlight the need to reconsider this practice, which is no longer supported by evidence and already safely waived in multiple medical settings in the United States and around the world.


Subject(s)
Pregnancy Trimester, First , Rh Isoimmunization , Humans , Female , Pregnancy , Rh Isoimmunization/prevention & control , Rh Isoimmunization/economics , Rh-Hr Blood-Group System , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/economics , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/therapeutic use , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/administration & dosage , Uterine Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Uterine Hemorrhage/economics , Adult
2.
Prenat Diagn ; 39(3): 238-247, 2019 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30610742

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and costs of three different strategies of antenatal rhesus immune globulin (RhIG) administration in a US population. METHODS: A decision tree analysis was undertaken for universal antenatal RhIG administration based on RhD serologic paternity testing, universal administration without paternity, and selective antenatal RhIG administration using cell free fetal DNA (cfDNA) for RHD fetal typing. Rates of alloimmunization were calculated. Charges were determined for laboratory testing and obstetrical and neonatal treatments for the first pregnancy and cases of alloimmunization in the following pregnancy. RESULTS: The largest number of new RhD alloimmunization cases resulted from a strategy of universal RhIG that included paternity. Fewer cases resulted from a selective strategy; the least number of cases were associated with a universal approach that discounted paternity. When the costs of first pregnancies and alloimmunized second pregnancies were combined, a universal strategy that excludes paternity had the least costs followed by a selective strategy followed by a universal strategy that included paternity. CONCLUSION: The use of cfDNA to determine the selective use of antenatal RhIG would not be cost-effective in the United States. Universal antenatal RhIG without paternity is more effective in preventing new cases of alloimmunization than the current ACOG guideline.


Subject(s)
Noninvasive Prenatal Testing/economics , Rh Isoimmunization/prevention & control , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/therapeutic use , Cell-Free Nucleic Acids/analysis , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Humans , Male , Paternity , Pregnancy , Rh Isoimmunization/economics , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/economics , Triage
3.
BJOG ; 125(11): 1414-1422, 2018 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29415334

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of high-throughput, non-invasive prenatal testing (HT-NIPT) for fetal Rhesus D (RhD) genotype to guide antenatal prophylaxis with anti-D immunoglobulin compared with routine antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin prophylaxis (RAADP). DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness decision-analytic modelling. SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: A simulated population of 100 000 RhD-negative women not known to be sensitised to the RhD antigen. METHODS: A decision tree model was used to characterise the antenatal care pathway in England and the long-term consequences of sensitisation events. The diagnostic accuracy of HT-NIPT was derived from a systematic review and bivariate meta-analysis; estimates of other inputs were derived from relevant literature sources and databases. Women in whom the HT-NIPT was positive or inconclusive continued to receive RAADP, whereas women with a negative result received none. Five alternative strategies in which the use of HT-NIPT may affect the existing postpartum care pathway were considered. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs expressed in 2015GBP and impact on health outcomes expressed in terms of quality-adjusted life-years over a lifetime. RESULTS: The results suggested that HT-NIPT appears cost saving but also less effective than current practice, irrespective of the postpartum strategy evaluated. A postpartum strategy in which inconclusive test results are distinguished from positive results performed best. HT-NIPT is only cost-effective when the overall test cost is £26.60 or less. CONCLUSIONS: HT-NIPT would reduce unnecessary treatment with routine anti-D immunoglobulin and is cost saving when compared with current practice. The extent of any savings and cost-effectiveness is sensitive to the overall test cost. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: HT-NIPT is cost saving compared with providing anti-D to all RhD-negative pregnant women.


Subject(s)
Pregnancy Complications, Hematologic/prevention & control , Prenatal Care/economics , Prenatal Diagnosis/economics , Rh Isoimmunization/prevention & control , Rh-Hr Blood-Group System/analysis , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Fetus/immunology , Genotype , Humans , Immunologic Factors/economics , Immunologic Factors/therapeutic use , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Hematologic/economics , Pregnancy Complications, Hematologic/immunology , Prenatal Care/methods , Prenatal Diagnosis/methods , Rh Isoimmunization/economics , Rh Isoimmunization/immunology , Rh-Hr Blood-Group System/genetics , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/economics , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/therapeutic use
4.
Am J Health Syst Pharm ; 72(4): 267-76, 2015 Feb 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25631833

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The pharmacologic properties of Rhesus (Rh) immune globulin (RhIG) and clinical data on its effectiveness in preventing Rh-antigen alloimmunization in pregnant women are reviewed. SUMMARY: RhIG is a human plasma derivative that targets red blood cells (RBCs) positive for Rh(O) antigen (also called D antigen). In the United States and other countries, the widespread use of RhIG has markedly reduced the occurrence of hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN), a devastating condition caused by D-antigen sensitization of a pregnant woman via exposure to fetal RBCs (usually during detachment of the placenta in labor) that results in a maternal immune response leading to severe hemolysis in the fetus. Routine administration of RhIG at 26-30 weeks' gestation and again within 72 hours of delivery has been shown to be highly effective in preventing maternal Rh alloimmunization, with very low rates of D-antigen sensitization (in the range of 0-2.2%) reported in multiple studies of at-risk women. The four RhIG products currently available in the United States have common clinical indications but differ in certain attributes. Pharmacists can play an important role in guiding other clinicians on the rationale for the use of RhIG, important differences between products, and appropriate timing of RhIG therapy. CONCLUSION: Routine administration of RhIG to women at risk for Rh alloimmunization is clinically effective and has made HDFN a rare clinical event. The available RhIG products are not the same and should be carefully reviewed to ensure that they are administered safely.


Subject(s)
Rh Isoimmunization/prevention & control , Rh-Hr Blood-Group System/immunology , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/therapeutic use , Adult , Erythrocytes/immunology , Female , Hemolysis , Humans , Pregnancy , Rh Isoimmunization/economics , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/adverse effects , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/economics
5.
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol ; 45(1): 84-8, 2015 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25380024

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Non-invasive fetal Rhesus (Rh) D genotyping, using cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) in the maternal blood, allows targeted antenatal anti-RhD prophylaxis in unsensitized RhD-negative pregnant women. The purpose of this study was to determine the cost and benefit of this approach as compared to routine antenatal anti-RhD prophylaxis for all unsensitized RhD-negative pregnant women, as is the current policy in the province of Alberta, Canada. METHODS: This study was a decision analysis based on a theoretical population representing the total number of pregnancies in Alberta over a 1-year period (n = 69 286). A decision tree was created that outlined targeted prophylaxis for unsensitized RhD-negative pregnant women screened for cffDNA (targeted group) vs routine prophylaxis for all unsensitized RhD-negative pregnant women (routine group). Probabilities at each decision point and costs associated with each resource were calculated from local clinical and administrative data. Outcomes measured were cost, number of women sensitized and doses of Rh immunoglobulin (RhIG) administered. RESULTS: The estimated cost per pregnancy for the routine group was 71.43 compared with 67.20 Canadian dollars in the targeted group. The sensitization rates per RhD-negative pregnancy were equal, at 0.0012, for the current and targeted programs. Implementing targeted antenatal anti-RhD prophylaxis would save 4072 doses (20.1%) of RhIG over a 1-year period in Alberta when compared to the current program. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the feasibility of a targeted antenatal anti-RhD prophylaxis program, at a lower cost than that of the existing routine prophylaxis program, with no increased risk of sensitization.


Subject(s)
DNA/blood , Pregnancy Complications, Hematologic/prevention & control , Rh Isoimmunization/prevention & control , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/therapeutic use , Adult , Canada , Cell-Free System , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Hematologic/economics , Program Evaluation , Rh Isoimmunization/economics , Rh-Hr Blood-Group System , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/economics
7.
Obstet Gynecol ; 123(5): 938-945, 2014 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24785843

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the potential economic benefit of reduced indirect antiglobulin screening for Rh(D)-negative pregnant women. METHODS: A chart review of all Rh(D)-negative mothers delivering at the University of Washington from 2002 to 2012 was conducted to determine the rate of gestational seroconversion to anti-D antibodies before 28 weeks of gestation. A decision tree was constructed to estimate the economic effects of eliminating the indirect antiglobulin screen at 28 weeks of gestation and instead immunizing all Rh(D)-negative, anti-D antibody-negative women with anti-D immune globulin at that time. A theoretical cohort of 100,000 women was modeled. Probabilities and costs were derived from published literature, chart review, and expert opinion. Univariate sensitivity analyses followed by a Monte Carlo analysis examined assumptions and uncertainties in our model across entire distributions. RESULTS: The seroconversion rate of development of anti-D antibodies before 28 weeks of gestation in the cohort analyzed was 0.099% (2/2,029 women). From a societal perspective, the expected cost savings from implementing the reduced indirect antiglobulin screening strategy, per 100,000 women, ranged from $6 to $7.7 million. The overall cost savings for implementing this strategy in the United States for 1 year ranged from $34.7 to $35.6 million. This strategy remained cost-beneficial when varying our parameters (eg, anti-D immune globulin, antibody test cost) to their logical extremes. The Monte Carlo analysis verified the cost savings of our strategy. CONCLUSION: The updated seroconversion rate and our model suggest that eliminating the 28-week antibody screen would be cost-beneficial from a societal perspective while posing minimal potential harm to the recipients.


Subject(s)
Coombs Test/economics , Immunologic Factors/economics , Rh Isoimmunization/economics , Rh-Hr Blood-Group System/immunology , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/economics , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Decision Trees , Female , Gestational Age , Humans , Immunologic Factors/therapeutic use , Models, Economic , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Trimester, Third , Rh Isoimmunization/diagnosis , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/therapeutic use , United States
10.
Obstet Gynecol ; 122(3): 579-85, 2013 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23921866

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To examine the cost and clinical outcomes of noninvasive RhD typing with cell-free fetal DNA to selectively deliver antenatal and postnatal prophylaxis with anti-D immune globulin for prevention of alloimmunization in RhD-negative women. METHODS: We developed a decision tree to compare the costs and clinical outcomes of three strategies in an RhD-negative nonalloimmunized population as follows: 1) routine antenatal anti-D immune globulin prophylaxis and postpartum prophylaxis guided by cord blood typing (the current approach in most of the United States); 2) noninvasive fetal RhD typing with prophylaxis guided by test results; and 3) no screening or prophylaxis. Costs were estimated for testing and treatment algorithms using hospital billing records and information from the manufacturer of the fetal RhD genotyping test. Probability estimates were derived from published literature. The decision tree and sensitivity analyses were constructed and performed with Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: We estimated the cost of the current approach to prevention of alloimmunization to be $351 per pregnancy, and we estimated the cost of noninvasive determination of fetal RhD status to be $682. Assuming essentially perfect test performance, threshold analysis found the cost must decrease to $119 to break even. The gap widened in favor of routine prophylaxis in most other circumstances (increased false-negative test rate and decreasing prevalence of RhD negativity). CONCLUSION: Unless the cost of noninvasive fetal RhD typing is reduced substantially, routine antenatal anti-D immune globulin prophylaxis with postpartum prophylaxis guided by cord blood typing is less costly than noninvasive determination of fetal RhD status.


Subject(s)
Genotyping Techniques/economics , Rh Isoimmunization/economics , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/economics , Unnecessary Procedures/economics , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Decision Trees , Female , Humans , Infant Mortality , Infant, Newborn , Postpartum Period , Pregnancy , Rh Isoimmunization/prevention & control , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/therapeutic use
11.
Value Health ; 14(5): 768-76, 2011.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21839417

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Decisions about the use of new technologies in health care are often based on complex economic models. Decision makers frequently make informal judgments about evidence, uncertainty, and the assumptions that underpin these models. OBJECTIVES: Transparent interactive decision interrogator (TIDI) facilitates more formal critique of decision models by decision makers such as members of appraisal committees of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in the UK. By allowing them to run advanced statistical models under different scenarios in real time, TIDI can make the decision process more efficient and transparent, while avoiding limitations on pre-prepared analysis. METHODS: TIDI, programmed in Visual Basic for applications within Excel, provides an interface for controlling all components of a decision model developed in the appropriate software (e.g., meta-analysis in WinBUGS and the decision model in R) by linking software packages using RExcel and R2WinBUGS. TIDI's graphical controls allow the user to modify assumptions and to run the decision model, and results are returned to an Excel spreadsheet. A tool displaying tornado plots helps to evaluate the influence of individual parameters on the model outcomes, and an interactive meta-analysis module allows the user to select any combination of available studies, explore the impact of bias adjustment, and view results using forest plots. We demonstrate TIDI using an example of a decision model in antenatal care. CONCLUSION: Use of TIDI during the NICE appraisal of tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors (in psoriatic arthritis) successfully demonstrated its ability to facilitate critiques of the decision models by decision makers.


Subject(s)
Decision Support Techniques , Evidence-Based Medicine , Models, Statistical , Technology Assessment, Biomedical , Arthritis, Psoriatic/drug therapy , Arthritis, Psoriatic/economics , Arthritis, Psoriatic/immunology , Bias , Computer Graphics , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Drug Costs , Evidence-Based Medicine/economics , Evidence-Based Medicine/statistics & numerical data , Fetus/immunology , Health Services Research , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/economics , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Models, Economic , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/economics , Prenatal Diagnosis/economics , Rh Isoimmunization/diagnosis , Rh Isoimmunization/economics , Rh Isoimmunization/immunology , Rh Isoimmunization/prevention & control , Rh-Hr Blood-Group System/immunology , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/economics , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/therapeutic use , Software , Technology Assessment, Biomedical/economics , Technology Assessment, Biomedical/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome , Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha/antagonists & inhibitors , Uncertainty , United Kingdom , User-Computer Interface
12.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol ; 146(1): 65-70, 2009 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19482403

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential impact of new guidelines recommending routine antenatal prophylaxis at 28 weeks of pregnancy on incidence, consequences and cost of rhesus immunization. STUDY DESIGN: All rhesus immunizations of 224,500 ongoing pregnancies in two neighbouring administrative areas in France between 2000 and 2006 were enrolled in this retrospective study. To determine the aetiology of immunization and to specify when sensitization occurred, we searched sensitizing events between the last negative and the first positive red-cell antibody test results. Perinatal consequences and costing were also analyzed. RESULTS: From 138 rhesus negative women bearing anti-D antibodies, none had received routine prophylaxis at 28 weeks. 37% were primary immunizations and 63% were reactivating former immunization. 63% sensitizations occurred after unprovoked foetal-maternal haemorrhage, mostly after 28 weeks (54%). Twenty-five (18.1%) sensitizations resulted from inappropriate management of existing prophylaxis. Immigrants with previously acquired antibodies accounted for 10% of cases. There was no foetal demise and none born before 28 weeks among our 140 babies. Only 25% required intensive care, mostly those born to mothers reactivating immunization, with an overall good perinatal outcome. Systematic 28-week prophylaxis would have cost about euro 2.5 million to reduce overall cost of immunizations by euro 0.6 million. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of rhesus immunization in our population was low at 0.41 per thousand. Routine antenatal prophylaxis could have avoided 54% of these immunizations but expected perinatal benefits are low, as newborns with the worst issue were born to mothers with unavoidable immunizations. Therefore the cost-effectiveness of this strategy is doubtful.


Subject(s)
Rh Isoimmunization/prevention & control , Adolescent , Adult , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Fetomaternal Transfusion/drug therapy , Fetomaternal Transfusion/immunology , France/epidemiology , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Isoantibodies/economics , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Hematologic/immunology , Retrospective Studies , Rh Isoimmunization/economics , Rh Isoimmunization/epidemiology , Rh Isoimmunization/immunology , Rh-Hr Blood-Group System/immunology , Rho(D) Immune Globulin
13.
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) ; 35(1 Suppl): 1S104-1S111, 2006 Feb.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16495835

ABSTRACT

Any prevention policy has a cost. For anti-D immunization, the main questions concern the cost of a change in the prevention policy by the health insurance fund and more globally by the society in general. Furthermore, the analysis must also examine the cost effectiveness of systematic prevention extended to all Rhesus negative women in comparison with targeted prevention or no prevention. Studies published in Great Britain, Canada, and The United States have generally concluded that the raw cost of systematic prevention is high compared with targeted prevention. On the other hand, the cost-effectiveness would favor the systematic approach. These data are difficult to apply to the French situation because health care costs are different and because of the lack of perfectly reliable epidemiological data on the frequency and consequences of severe forms of allo-immunization. Technological advances, particularly concerning genotyping of fetal Rhesus from maternal blood samples, could have an important impact on the cost factor if a systematic approach is adopted.


Subject(s)
Health Care Costs , Rh Isoimmunization/prevention & control , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/economics , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/therapeutic use , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , France , Humans , Pregnancy , Prenatal Care/economics , Rh Isoimmunization/economics
14.
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol ; 44(5): 458-9, 2004 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15387870

ABSTRACT

The present study aimed to calculate the rate of Rhesus D iso-immunisation during pregnancy in Wellington, New Zealand and to identify the timing of iso-immunisation. The notes of all women and their babies with positive antenatal anti-D antibody screens during the period 1994-2002 at the regional reference laboratory (Wellington Blood Transfusion Service) were reviewed to identify the antibody titre and the stage of pregnancy that the antibodies developed. Twelve percent of all tested pregnant women were Rhesus D negative and the annual immunisation rate during pregnancy was 1.4%. Sensitisation during the third trimester occurred in 50% of these women. Sensitisation in the third trimester was more common in primigravid women (87%) than in multiparous women (27%).


Subject(s)
Erythrocytes/immunology , Rh Isoimmunization/prevention & control , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/immunology , Erythrocytes/metabolism , Female , Humans , Mass Screening , New Zealand , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Hematologic/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , Rh Isoimmunization/economics , Rh-Hr Blood-Group System/immunology , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
15.
BJOG ; 111(9): 903-7, 2004 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15327602

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the economics of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis in the prevention of haemolytic disease of the newborn, in support of the NICE appraisals process. DESIGN: Cost effectiveness analysis. SETTING: UK NHS. POPULATION/SAMPLE: Pregnant women who are RhD-negative. METHODS: A model was constructed to estimate the incremental cost effectiveness and cost utility of: (1) offering routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis to all pregnant women who are RhD-negative; (2) offering routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis to RhD-negative primigravidae, compared with conventional management alone. Effectiveness estimates were derived from a meta-analysis of two UK community-based studies. Costs were derived from published sources and NHS product lists. Threshold analysis was conducted to reflect the social value of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis through incorporating valuations of parental grief and fetal/neonatal loss. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost per life year gained and cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: The cost per life year gained is in the range pound 5,000- pound 15,000. The inclusion of long term neurodevelopmental problems results in a cost utility ranging between pound 11,000 and pound 52,000 per QALY gained. Threshold analysis suggests that if fetal loss, parental grief and subsequent high intervention pregnancy are valued at greater than 9 QALYs, the comprehensive policy would be more attractive than the primigravidae policy, assuming a maximum acceptable threshold of pound 30,000 per QALY. CONCLUSION: Routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis provides a cost effective intervention for preventing haemolytic disease of the newborn in the pregnancies of women who are RhD-negative.


Subject(s)
Erythroblastosis, Fetal/prevention & control , Pregnancy Complications, Hematologic/prevention & control , Rh Isoimmunization/prevention & control , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/therapeutic use , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Erythroblastosis, Fetal/economics , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Hematologic/economics , Rh Isoimmunization/economics , Rh-Hr Blood-Group System , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/economics
18.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet ; 66(1): 63-70, 1999 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-10458556

ABSTRACT

The reduction in the incidence of Rh D alloimmunization is a prototype for the effectiveness of preventive medicine. Some controversies remain, however, such as the use of anti-D immune globulin in patients with either threatened abortion or antenatal hemorrhage. Similarly, it may not be cost-effective either to screen all Rh D-negative patients with an indirect Coombs test at 24-28 weeks of gestation or to screen all postpartum patients for excessive fetomaternal hemorrhage.


Subject(s)
Rh Isoimmunization/prevention & control , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/administration & dosage , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Drug Utilization/standards , Female , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Isoantigens/immunology , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications , Prenatal Care , Rh Isoimmunization/economics , Rho(D) Immune Globulin/economics
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...