Cost Analysis of Surgical and Medical Uterine Evacuation Methods for First-Trimester Abortion Used in Public Hospitals in Mexico

被引:0
作者
Eduardo Sanchez-Morales, Jorge [1 ]
Luis Rodriguez-Contreras, Jose [2 ]
Ruiz-Lara, Leslie [3 ]
Ochoa-Torres, Beatriz [3 ]
Zaragoza, Mara [3 ]
Padilla-Zuniga, Karen [3 ]
机构
[1] Natl Inst Publ Hlth INSP, Hlth Syst Res Ctr, Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico
[2] Hlth Inst Welf INSABI, Div Med Equipment Management, Minist Hlth, Mexico City, DF, Mexico
[3] Ipas Cent Amer & Mexico Ipas CAM, Mexico City, DF, Mexico
来源
HEALTH SERVICES INSIGHTS | 2022年 / 15卷
关键词
Cost; first trimester; Mexico; medical abortion; surgical abortion; health system; VACUUM ASPIRATION; UNSAFE ABORTION; SAFE ABORTION; COMPLICATIONS; TERMINATION; MISOPROSTOL; PREGNANCY; SERVICES; LEGAL; CITY;
D O I
10.1177/11786329221126347
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
BACKGROUND: Data on abortion procedures costs are scarce in low- and middle-income countries. In Mexico, the only known study was conducted more than a decade ago, with data from years before the abortion legislation. This study estimated the costs, from the health system's perspective. of surgical and medical abortion methods commonly used by women who undergo first-trimester abortion in Mexico. METHODS: Data were collected on staff time, salaries, medications. consumables, equipment, imaging, and lab studies, at 5 public general hospitals. A bottom-up micro-costing approach was used. RESULTS: Surgical abortion costs were US$201 for manual vacuum aspiration and US$298 for sharp curettage. The cost of medical abortion with misoprostol was US$85. The use of cervical ripening increases the costs by up to 18%. Staff comprised up to 72% of total costs in surgical abortions. Hospitalization was the area where most of the spending occurred, due to the staff and post-surgical surveillance required. CONCLUSIONS: Our estimates reflect the costs of "real-life" implementation and highlight the impact on costs of the overuse of resources not routinely recommended by clinical guidelines, such as cervical ripening for surgical abortion. This information will help decision-makers to generate policies that contribute to more efficient use of resources.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2012, REPROD HEALTH MATTER, V20, P205
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2015, 2 ROYAL COLL OBST GY
[3]   Mifepristone versus vaginally administered misoprostol for cervical priming before first-trimester termination of pregnancy: A randomized, controlled study [J].
Ashok, PW ;
Flett, GMM ;
Templeton, A .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2000, 183 (04) :998-1002
[4]   Maternal mortality in six low and lower-middle income countries from 2010 to 2018: risk factors and trends [J].
Bauserman, Melissa ;
Thorsten, Vanessa R. ;
Nolen, Tracy L. ;
Patterson, Jackie ;
Lokangaka, Adrien ;
Tshefu, Antoinette ;
Patel, Archana B. ;
Hibberd, Patricia L. ;
Garces, Ana L. ;
Figueroa, Lester ;
Krebs, Nancy F. ;
Esamai, Fabian ;
Nyongesa, Paul ;
Liechty, Edward A. ;
Carlo, Waldemar A. ;
Chomba, Elwyn ;
Goudar, Shivaprasad S. ;
Kavi, Avinash ;
Derman, Richard J. ;
Saleem, Sarah ;
Jessani, Saleem ;
Billah, Sk Masum ;
Koso-Thomas, Marion ;
McClure, Elizabeth M. ;
Goldenberg, Robert L. ;
Bose, Carl .
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH, 2020, 17 (Suppl 3)
[5]  
Bedewi M., 2013, J AM SCI, V9, P581
[6]   A comparative study of cost of care and duration of management for first-trimester abortion with manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) and sharp curettage [J].
Choobun, Thanapan ;
Khanuengkitkong, Siwatchaya ;
Pinjaroen, Sutham .
ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS, 2012, 286 (05) :1161-1164
[7]   Medical versus surgical treatment of first trimester spontaneous abortion: A cost-minimization analysis [J].
Cubo Nava, Ana ;
Soto Pino, Zandra M. ;
Haro Perez, Ana M. ;
Hernandez Hernandez, M. Estrella ;
Doyague Sanchez, M. Jose ;
Sayagues Manzano, Jose M. .
PLOS ONE, 2019, 14 (01)
[8]   EFFECTIVENESS AND COMPLICATIONS OF ABORTION BY DILATATION AND VACUUM ASPIRATION VERSUS DILATATION AND RIGID METAL CURETTAGE [J].
EDELMAN, DA ;
BRENNER, WE ;
BERGER, GS .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1974, 119 (04) :473-480
[9]  
FIGO, 2011, CONS STAT UT EV
[10]  
Henshaw SK, 2008, INT FAM PLAN PERSPEC, V34, P40, DOI 10.1363/ifpp.34.140.08