Journal article

A cost-utility analysis of neonatal circumcision.

Van Howe R ...see all

Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, vol. 24, issue 6 (2004) pp. 584-601

  • 12


    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • N/A


    Citations of this article.
Sign in to save reference


A cost-utility analysis, based on published data from multiple observational studies, comparing boys circumcised at birth and those not circumcised was undertaken using the Quality of Well-being Scale, a Markov analysis, the standard reference case, and a societal perspective. Neonatal circumcision increased incremental costs by $828.42 per patient and resulted in an incremental 15.30 well-years lost per 1000 males. If neonatal circumcision was cost-free, pain-free, and had no immediate complications, it was still more costly than not circumcising. Using sensitivity analysis, it was impossible to arrange a scenario that made neonatal circumcision cost-effective. Neonatal circumcision is not good health policy, and support for it as a medical procedure cannot be justified financially or medically.

Author-supplied keywords

  • Circumcision, Male
  • Circumcision, Male: adverse effects
  • Circumcision, Male: economics
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Hospitalization
  • Hospitalization: economics
  • Humans
  • Infant, Newborn
  • Male
  • Markov Chains
  • Postoperative Complications
  • Postoperative Complications: economics
  • Postoperative Complications: etiology

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document


  • Robert S Van Howe

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free