4.6 Article

Antiviral Medications for Pregnant Women for Pandemic and Seasonal Influenza An Economic Computer Model

期刊

OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
卷 114, 期 5, 页码 971-980

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181bdbfed

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute of General Medical Sciences Models of Infectious Disease Agent Study (MIDAS) [5U01GM070708-05]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the economic value of administering antiviral medications to pregnant women who have come in contact with an infectious individual with influenza. METHODS: A computer-simulation model was developed to predict the potential economic effect of antiviral use for postexposure prophylaxis among pregnant women in both seasonal influenza and pandemic influenza scenarios. The model allowed us to examine the effects of varying influenza exposure risk, antiviral efficacy, antiviral cost, and the probability of different influenza outcomes such as hospitalization, preterm delivery, and mortality. RESULTS: For a variety of pandemic influenza scenarios (attack rate 20% or more, probability of preterm birth for women with influenza 12% or more, mortality for a preterm neonate 2% or more, and probability of influenza-attributable hospitalization 4.8% or more), the postexposure prophylactic use of antiviral medications was strongly cost-effective, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratio values below $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Antiviral prophylaxis became an economically dominant strategy (that is, less costly and more effective) when the influenza attack rate is 20% or more and preterm birth rate is 36% or more, and when attack rate is 30% or more and preterm birth rate is 24% or more. Antiviral prophylaxis was not cost-effective under seasonal influenza conditions. CONCLUSION: These findings support the use of antiviral medications for postexposure prophylaxis among pregnant women in a pandemic influenza scenario but not in a seasonal influenza setting. (Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:971-80)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据