Minimising twins in in vitro fertilisation: a modelling study assessing the costs, consequences and cost-utility of elective single versus double embryo transfer over a 20-year time horizon.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cumulative costs and consequences of double embryo transfer (DET) or elective single embryo transfer (eSET) in women commencing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment aged 32, 36 and 39 years. DESIGN: Microsimulation model. SETTING: Three assisted reproduction centres in Scotland. SAMPLE: A total of 6153 women undergoing treatment at one of three Scottish IVF clinics, between January 1997 and June 2007. METHODS: A microsimulation model, populated using data inputs derived from a large clinical data set and published literature, was developed to compare the costs and consequences of using eSET or DET over multiple treatment cycles. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Disability-free live births; twin pregnancy rate; women's quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs); health service costs. RESULTS: Not only did DET produce a higher cumulative live birth rate compared with eSET for women of all three ages, but also a higher twin pregnancy rate. Compared with eSET, DET ranged from costing an additional £ 27,356 per extra live birth in women commencing treatment aged 32 years, to costing £ 15,539 per extra live birth in 39-year-old women. DET cost ∼ £ 28,300 and ∼ £ 20,300 per additional QALY in women commencing treatment aged 32 and 39 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the high twin pregnancy rate associated with DET, coupled with uncertainty surrounding QALY gains, eSET is likely to be the preferred option for most women aged ≤ 36 years. The cost-effectiveness of DET improves with age, and may be considered cost-effective in some groups of older women. The decision may best be considered on a case-by-case basis for women aged 37-39 years.

Costs and consequences of automated algorithms versus manual grading for the detection of referable diabetic retinopathy.

AIMS: To assess the cost-effectiveness of an improved automated grading algorithm for diabetic retinopathy against a previously described algorithm, and in comparison with manual grading. METHODS: Efficacy of the alternative algorithms was assessed using a reference graded set of images from three screening centres in Scotland (1253 cases with observable/referable retinopathy and 6333 individuals with mild or no retinopathy). Screening outcomes and grading and diagnosis costs were modelled for a cohort of 180 000 people, with prevalence of referable retinopathy at 4%. Algorithm (b), which combines image quality assessment with detection algorithms for microaneurysms (MA), blot haemorrhages and exudates, was compared with a simpler algorithm (a) (using image quality assessment and MA/dot haemorrhage (DH) detection), and the current practice of manual grading. RESULTS: Compared with algorithm (a), algorithm (b) would identify an additional 113 cases of referable retinopathy for an incremental cost of pound 68 per additional case. Compared with manual grading, automated grading would be expected to identify between 54 and 123 fewer referable cases, for a grading cost saving between pound 3834 and pound 1727 per case missed. Extrapolation modelling over a 20-year time horizon suggests manual grading would cost between pound 25,676 and pound 267,115 per additional quality adjusted life year gained. CONCLUSIONS: Algorithm (b) is more cost-effective than the algorithm based on quality assessment and MA/DH detection. With respect to the value of introducing automated detection systems into screening programmes, automated grading operates within the recommended national standards in Scotland and is likely to be considered a cost-effective alternative to manual disease/no disease grading.

Safety versus success in elective single embryo transfer: women's preferences for outcomes of in vitro fertilisation.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether women waiting to undergo in vitro fertilisation (IVF) view adverse outcomes associated with twin pregnancy as more desirable than having no pregnancy at all. DESIGN: Women's preference values for five adverse birth outcomes associated with twin pregnancy were compared with their preference value for treatment failure (TF), i.e. no pregnancy at all. SETTING: Aberdeen Fertility Centre, University of Aberdeen, UK. POPULATION: A total of 74 women waiting to undergo IVF. METHODS: The standard gamble method was used to elicit women's preference values for giving birth to a child with physical impairments (PI), cognitive impairments (CI), or visual impairments (VI), perinatal death (PD) without a subsequent pregnancy, premature delivery (PremD), and TF (no pregnancy). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Preference values were elicited on a scale where 1 represents giving birth to a healthy child and 0 represents immediate death. RESULTS: The median preference values for having a child with PI, CI, or VI were 0.940, 0.970, and 0.975, respectively. The median values for PremD, PD, and TF were 0.955, 0.725, and 0.815, respectively. Having no child at all was valued significantly lower than having a child with PI, CI, or VI (P < 0.01) but significantly higher than PD (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Some women waiting for IVF treatment view severe child disability outcomes associated with double embryo transfer as being more desirable than having no child at all. Women embarking on IVF may be influenced more strongly by considerations of 'treatment success' rather than future risks to their offspring.

Cost-effectiveness of implementing automated grading within the national screening programme for diabetic retinopathy in Scotland.

AIMS: National screening programmes for diabetic retinopathy using digital photography and multi-level manual grading systems are currently being implemented in the UK. Here, we assess the cost-effectiveness of replacing first level manual grading in the National Screening Programme in Scotland with an automated system developed to assess image quality and detect the presence of any retinopathy. METHODS: A decision tree model was developed and populated using sensitivity/specificity and cost data based on a study of 6722 patients in the Grampian region. Costs to the NHS, and the number of appropriate screening outcomes and true referable cases detected in 1 year were assessed. RESULTS: For the diabetic population of Scotland (approximately 160,000), with prevalence of referable retinopathy at 4% (6400 true cases), the automated strategy would be expected to identify 5560 cases (86.9%) and the manual strategy 5610 cases (87.7%). However, the automated system led to savings in grading and quality assurance costs to the NHS of 201,600 pounds per year. The additional cost per additional referable case detected (manual vs automated) totalled 4088 pounds and the additional cost per additional appropriate screening outcome (manual vs automated) was 1990 pounds. CONCLUSIONS: Given that automated grading is less costly and of similar effectiveness, it is likely to be considered a cost-effective alternative to manual grading.

The efficacy of automated "disease/no disease" grading for diabetic retinopathy in a systematic screening programme.

AIM: To assess the efficacy of automated "disease/no disease" grading for diabetic retinopathy within a systematic screening programme. METHODS: Anonymised images were obtained from consecutive patients attending a regional primary care based diabetic retinopathy screening programme. A training set of 1067 images was used to develop automated grading algorithms. The final software was tested using a separate set of 14 406 images from 6722 patients. The sensitivity and specificity of manual and automated systems operating as "disease/no disease" graders (detecting poor quality images and any diabetic retinopathy) were determined relative to a clinical reference standard. RESULTS: The reference standard classified 8.2% of the patients as having ungradeable images (technical failures) and 62.5% as having no retinopathy. Detection of technical failures or any retinopathy was achieved by manual grading with 86.5% sensitivity (95% confidence interval 85.1 to 87.8) and 95.3% specificity (94.6 to 95.9) and by automated grading with 90.5% sensitivity (89.3 to 91.6) and 67.4% specificity (66.0 to 68.8). Manual and automated grading detected 99.1% and 97.9%, respectively, of patients with referable or observable retinopathy/maculopathy. Manual and automated grading detected 95.7% and 99.8%, respectively, of technical failures. CONCLUSION: Automated "disease/no disease" grading of diabetic retinopathy could safely reduce the burden of grading in diabetic retinopathy screening programmes.

Is elective single embryo transfer a cost-effective alternative to double embryo transfer?

Elective single embryo transfer (eSET) is increasingly being considered as a means to reduce twin pregnancies associated with in vitro fertilisation treatment. However, it is important to consider the cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies when considering a change in policy. A review of the literature showed only five studies assessing both costs and consequences of strategies involving eSET compared with double embryo transfer. Several limitations in these studies prevent a definitive conclusion on the cost-effectiveness of eSET being reached. Future economic evaluations need to compare strategies relevant to routine practice, include all relevant costs, measure and value longer term outcomes appropriately, and assess the cost-effectiveness of eSET across different subgroups of women.

What do doctors think their caseload should be to maintain their skills for delivery care?

OBJECTIVES: To seek the opinions of doctors on what they thought the minimum, maximum and optimum annual caseload should be for the maintenance of skills and competence in a variety of obstetric procedures. METHODS: An expert panel of respondents from Africa and Asia was asked to give their opinions on what they believed the minimum, maximum and optimum caseload should be for 11 obstetric procedures via a series of structured questionnaires (Delphi exercise). In subsequent questionnaires, participants were asked if they wished to reconsider their opinions in light of the group response. RESULTS: The median values of responses given for the minimum, maximum and optimum caseloads for the 11 obstetric procedures did not change substantially over time, though greater consensus was developed as indicated by reductions in the size of inter-quartile ranges in later rounds. CONCLUSIONS: We encountered several problems associated with using the Delphi technique in this context, which throws doubt on the validity and usefulness of our results. Caseload is just one of many factors, as indicated by our expert panel that need to be considered when planning the delivery of obstetric services in remote areas. High quality training, continued medical education, appropriate quality assurance procedures, and provision of a supportive enabling environment are also important requirements. In addition, the views of clinicians need to be balanced against more objective evidence of quality of care and patient outcome in relation to procedural volume. Such evidence is lacking in the field of obstetrics and requires further investigation.