Dataset Information

Uptake, outcomes, and costs of implementing non-invasive prenatal testing for Down's syndrome into NHS maternity care: prospective cohort study in eight diverse maternity units.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To investigate the benefits and costs of implementing non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for Down's syndrome into the NHS maternity care pathway.

Design

Prospective cohort study.

Setting

Eight maternity units across the United Kingdom between 1 November 2013 and 28 February 2015.

Participants

All pregnant women with a current Down's syndrome risk on screening of at least 1/1000.

Main outcome measures

Outcomes were uptake of NIPT, number of cases of Down's syndrome detected, invasive tests performed, and miscarriages avoided. Pregnancy outcomes and costs associated with implementation of NIPT, compared with current screening, were determined using study data on NIPT uptake and invasive testing in combination with national datasets.

Results

NIPT was prospectively offered to 3175 pregnant women. In 934 women with a Down's syndrome risk greater than 1/150, 695 (74.4%) chose NIPT, 166 (17.8%) chose invasive testing, and 73 (7.8%) declined further testing. Of 2241 women with risks between 1/151 and 1/1000, 1799 (80.3%) chose NIPT. Of 71 pregnancies with a confirmed diagnosis of Down's syndrome, 13/42 (31%) with the diagnosis after NIPT and 2/29 (7%) after direct invasive testing continued, resulting in 12 live births. In an annual screening population of 698 500, offering NIPT as a contingent test to women with a Down's syndrome screening risk of at least 1/150 would increase detection by 195 (95% uncertainty interval -34 to 480) cases with 3368 (2279 to 4027) fewer invasive tests and 17 (7 to 30) fewer procedure related miscarriages, for a non-significant difference in total costs (£-46 000, £-1 802 000 to £2 661 000). The marginal cost of NIPT testing strategies versus current screening is very sensitive to NIPT costs; at a screening threshold of 1/150, NIPT would be cheaper than current screening if it cost less than £256. Lowering the risk threshold increases the number of Down's syndrome cases detected and overall costs, while maintaining the reduction in invasive tests and procedure related miscarriages.

Conclusions

Implementation of NIPT as a contingent test within a public sector Down's syndrome screening programme can improve quality of care, choices for women, and overall performance within the current budget. As some women use NIPT for information only, the Down's syndrome live birth rate may not change significantly. Future research should consider NIPT uptake and informed decision making outside of a research setting.

SUBMITTER: Chitty LS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4933930 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess implementation of the Saving Babies Lives (SBL) Care Bundle, a collection of practice recommendations in four key areas, to reduce stillbirth in England.DesignA retrospective cohort study of 463,630 births in 19 NHS Trusts in England using routinely collected electronic data supplemented with case note audit (n = 1,658), and surveys of service users (n = 2,085) and health care professionals (n = 1,064). The primary outcome was stillbirth rate. Outcome rates two years before and after the nominal SBL implementation date were derived as a measure of change over the implementation period. Data were collected on secondary outcomes and process outcomes which reflected implementation of the SBL care bundle.ResultsThe total stillbirth rate, declined from 4.2 to 3.4 per 1,000 births between the two time points (adjusted Relative Risk (aRR) 0.80, 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) 0.70 to 0.91, P<0.001). There was a contemporaneous increase in induction of labour (aRR 1.20 (95%CI 1.18-1.21), p<0.001) and emergency Caesarean section (aRR 1.10 (95%CI 1.07-1.12), p<0.001). The number of ultrasound scans performed (aRR 1.25 (95%CI 1.21-1.28), p<0.001) and the proportion of small for gestational age infants detected (aRR 1.59 (95%CI 1.32-1.92), p<0.001) also increased. Organisations reporting higher levels of implementation had improvements in process measures in all elements of the care bundle. An economic analysis estimated the cost of implementing the care bundle at ~£140 per birth. However, neither the costs nor changes in outcomes could be definitively attributed to implementation of the SBL care bundle.ConclusionsImplementation of the SBL care bundle increased over time in the majority of sites. Implementation was associated with improvements in process outcomes. The reduction in stillbirth rates in participating sites exceeded that reported nationally in the same timeframe. The intervention should be refined to identify women who are most likely to benefit and minimise unwarranted intervention.Trial registrationThe study was registered on (NCT03231007); www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare maternal and neonatal birth outcomes and morbidities associated with the intention to give birth in a freestanding primary level midwife-led maternity unit (PMU) or tertiary level obstetric-led maternity hospital (TMH) in Canterbury, Aotearoa/New Zealand.DesignProspective cohort study.Participants407 women who intended to give birth in a PMU and 285 women who intended to give birth at the TMH in 2010-2011. All of the women planning a TMH birth were 'low risk', and 29 of the PMU cohort had identified risk factors.Primary outcomesMode of birth, Apgar score of less than 7 at 5 min and neonatal unit admission.Secondary outcomeslabour onset, analgesia, blood loss, third stage of labour management, perineal trauma, non-pharmacological pain relief, neonatal resuscitation, breastfeeding, gestational age at birth, birth weight, severe morbidity and mortality.ResultsWomen who planned a PMU birth were significantly more likely to have a spontaneous vaginal birth (77.9%vs62.3%, adjusted OR (AOR) 1.61, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.39), and significantly less likely to have an instrumental assisted vaginal birth (10.3%vs20.4%, AOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.93). The emergency and elective caesarean section rates were not significantly different (emergency: PMU 11.6% vs TMH 17.5%, AOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.40; elective: PMU 0.7% vs TMH 2.1%, AOR 0.34, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.41). There were no significant differences between the cohorts in rates of 5 min Apgar score of <7 (2.0%vs2.1%, AOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.52) and neonatal unit admission (5.9%vs4.9%, AOR 1.44, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.96). Planning to give birth in a primary unit was associated with similar or reduced odds of intrapartum interventions and similar odds of all measured neonatal well-being indicators.ConclusionsThe results of this study support freestanding midwife-led primary-level maternity units as physically safe places for well women to plan to give birth, with these women having higher rates of spontaneous vaginal births and lower rates of interventions and their associated morbidities than those who planned a tertiary hospital birth, with no differences in neonatal outcomes.

Project description:IntroductionMaternal and perinatal deaths occurring in low and middle income countries could be prevented with timely access to maternal and new-born care. In order to increase access to maternal and child health services, a well-functioning referral system that allows for continuity of care across different tiers of healthcare is required. A reliable healthcare system, with adequate numbers of skilled staff, resources and mechanisms, is critical to ensuring that access to care is available when the need arises.Material and methodsThis descriptive, qualitative study design was used to explore barriers to implementing a reliable referral system. Twelve individual qualitative interviews were conducted with health care providers working in rural and semi-urban district hospitals in the Northern, Western, Eastern and Southern zones of Tanzania. Thematic analysis guided analysis of data.ResultsThree (3) main and interconnected themes were abstracted from the data relating to participants' experiences of referring women with obstetric complications to adequate obstetric care. These were: 1. Adhering to a rigid referral protocol; 2. Completing the referral of women to an adequate health facility and 3. Communicating the condition of the woman with obstetric complications between the referring and receiving facilities.ConclusionBecause of referral regulations, assistant medical officers were unable to make referral decisions even when they felt that a referral was needed. The lack of availability of hospital transport as well as the lack of a reliable feedback mechanism, prohibited effective referrals of patients. The Ministry of Health should revise the referral protocol to allow all clinicians to provide referrals, including assistant medical officers- who make up the majority of clinical staff in rural health care facilities. A mechanism to ensure effective communication between the referral facility and the tertiary care hospital should be instituted for quality and continuity of care. Furthermore, health care facilities should put aside budget for fuelling the ambulance for effective referrals.