Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11851/1608
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorÖkem, Zeynep Güldem-
dc.contributor.authorÖrgül, Gökçen-
dc.contributor.authorTarı Kasnakoğlu, Berna-
dc.contributor.authorCakar, Mehmet-
dc.contributor.authorBeksaç, Mehmet Sinan-
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-03T14:45:15Z
dc.date.available2019-07-03T14:45:15Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationÖkem, Z. G., Örgül, G., Kasnakoglu, B. T., Çakar, M., & Beksaç, M. S. (2017). Economic analysis of prenatal screening strategies for Down syndrome in singleton pregnancies in Turkey. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 219, 40-44.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0301-2115
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.09.025-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11851/1608-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To examine the costs and outcomes of different screening strategies for Down Syndrome (DS) in singleton pregnancies. Study design: A decision-analytic model was developed to compare the costs and the outcomes of different prenatal screening strategies. Five strategies were compared for women under 35-year of age: 1A) triple test (TT), 2A); combined test (CT), 3A) Non-invasive Prenatal Screening Test by using cell free fetal DNA (NIPT), 4A) and 5A) NIPT as a second-step screening for high-risk patients detected by either TT, or CT respectively. For women >= 35-year of age, 1B) implementing invasive test (amniocentesis-AC) and 2B) NIPT for all women were compared. Data was analyzed to obtain the outcomes, total costs, the cost per women and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for screening strategies. Results: Among the current strategies for women under 35 years old, CT is clearly dominated to TT, as it is more effective and less costly. Although, the current routine practice (2A) is the least-costly strategy, implementing NIPT as a second step screening to high-risk women identified by CT (5A) would be more effective than 2A; leading to a 10.2% increase in the number of detected DS cases and a 96.3% reduction in procedural related losses (PRL). However, its cost to the Social Security Institution that is a public entity would be 17 times higher and increase screening costs by 1.5 times. Strategy 5A would result in an incremental cost effectiveness of 6,873,082 (PPP) US$ when compared to the current one (2A). Strategy 1B-for offering AC to all women >= 35-year of age is dominated over NIPT (2B), as it would detect more DS cases and would be less costly. On the other hand, there would be 206 PRL associated with AC, but NIPT provides clear clinical benefits as there would be no PRL with NIPT. Conclusions: NIPT leads to very high costs despite its high effectiveness in terms of detecting DS cases and avoiding PRL. The cost of NIPT should be decreased, otherwise, only individuals who can afford to pay from out-of-pocket could benefit. We believe that reliable cost-effective prenatal screening policies are essential in countries with low and smiddle income and high birth rates as well. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Science Bven_US
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Journal Of Obstetrics & Gynecology And Reproductive Biologyen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectDown syndromeen_US
dc.subjectPrenatal screeningen_US
dc.subjectTriple testen_US
dc.subjectCombined testen_US
dc.subjectNon-invasive prenatal testen_US
dc.subjectCost-effectivenessen_US
dc.subjectEconomic analysisen_US
dc.subjectAmniocentesisen_US
dc.titleEconomic Analysis of Prenatal Screening Strategies for Down Syndrome in Singleton Pregnancies in Turkeyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.departmentFaculties, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of International Entrepreneurshipen_US
dc.departmentFaculties, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of Managementen_US
dc.departmentFakülteler, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, Uluslararası Girişimcilik Bölümütr_TR
dc.departmentFakülteler, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, İşletme Bölümütr_TR
dc.identifier.volume219
dc.identifier.startpage40
dc.identifier.endpage44
dc.authorid0000-0002-8296-4107-
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000418213400007en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85031758268en_US
dc.institutionauthorÖkem, Zeynep Güldem-
dc.institutionauthorKasnakoğlu, Berna Tarı-
dc.identifier.pmid29040895en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.09.025-
dc.authorwosidM-3850-2019-
dc.authorscopusid56798593300-
dc.authorscopusid56845805200-
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2-
item.openairetypeArticle-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
crisitem.author.dept04.02. Department of International Entrepreneurship-
crisitem.author.dept04.03. Department of Management-
Appears in Collections:İşletme Bölümü / Department of Management
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu / PubMed Indexed Publications Collection
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu / Scopus Indexed Publications Collection
Uluslararası Girişimcilik Bölümü / Department of International Entrepreneurship
WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu / WoS Indexed Publications Collection
Show simple item record



CORE Recommender

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

4
checked on Dec 21, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

13
checked on Nov 9, 2024

Page view(s)

138
checked on Dec 23, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check




Altmetric


Items in GCRIS Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.