Cost-effectiveness of single-layer versus double-layer uterine closure during caesarean section on postmenstrual spotting: Economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial

3Citations
Citations of this article
32Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of double-layer compared with single-layer uterine closure after a first caesarean section (CS) from a societal and healthcare perspective. Design Economic evaluation alongside a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Setting 32 hospitals in the Netherlands, 2016-2018. Participants 2292 women ≥18 years undergoing a first CS were randomly assigned (1:1). Exclusion criteria were: inability for counselling, previous uterine surgery, known menstrual disorder, placenta increta or percreta, pregnant with three or more fetuses. 1144 women were assigned to single-layer and 1148 to double-layer closure. We included 1620 women with a menstrual cycle in the main analysis. Interventions Single-layer unlocked uterine closure and double-layer unlocked uterine closure with the second layer imbricating the first. Main outcome measures Spotting days, quality-Adjusted life-years (QALYs), and societal costs at 9 months of follow-up. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. Results No significant differences were found between single-layer versus double-layer closure in mean spotting days (1.44 and 1.39 days; mean difference (md)-0.056, 95% CI-0.374 to 0.263), QALYs (0.663 and 0.658; md-0.005, 95% CI-0.015 to 0.005), total healthcare costs (€744 and €727; md €-17, 95% CI-273 to 143), and total societal costs (€5689 and €5927; md €238, 95% CI-624 to 1108). The probability of the intervention being cost-effective at willingness-To-pay of €0, €10 000 and €20 000/QALY gained was 0.30, 0.27 and 0.25, respectively, (societal perspective), and 0.55, 0.41 and 0.32, respectively, (healthcare perspective). Conclusion Double-layer uterine closure is not cost-effective compared with single-layer uterine closure from both perspectives. If this is confirmed by our long-Term reproductive follow-up, we suggest to adjust uterine closure technique guidelines. Trial registration number NTR5480/NL5380.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Stegwee, S. I., Ben, Â. J., El Alili, M., Van Der Voet, L. F., De Groot, C. J. M., Bosmans, J. E., & Huirne, J. A. F. (2021). Cost-effectiveness of single-layer versus double-layer uterine closure during caesarean section on postmenstrual spotting: Economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open, 11(7). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044340

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free