Pulse oximetry as a screening test for congenital heart defects in newborn infants: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Abstract

Objective: To undertake a cost-effectiveness analysis that compares pulse oximetry as an adjunct to clinical examination with clinical examination alone in newborn screening for congenital heart defects (CHDs).

Design: Model-based economic evaluation using accuracy and cost data from a primary study supplemented from published sources taking an NHS perspective.

Setting: Six large maternity units in the UK.

Patients: 20 055 newborn infants prior to discharge from hospital.

Intervention: Pulse oximetry as an adjunct to clinical examination.

Main outcome measure: Cost effectiveness based on incremental cost per timely diagnosis.

Results: Pulse oximetry as an adjunct to clinical examination is twice as costly but provides a timely diagnosis to almost 30 additional cases of CHD per 100 000 live births compared with a modelled strategy of clinical examination alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for this strategy compared with clinical examination alone is approximately £24 000 per case of timely diagnosis in a population in which antenatal screening for CHDs already exists. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggests that at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of £100 000, the probability of 'pulse oximetry as an adjunct to clinical examination' being cost effective is more than 90%. Such a WTP threshold is plausible if a newborn with timely diagnosis of a CHD gained just five quality-adjusted life years, even when treatment costs are taken into consideration.

Conclusion: Pulse oximetry as an adjunct to current routine practice of clinical examination alone is likely to be considered a cost-effective strategy in the light of currently accepted thresholds.