Cost-effectiveness of induction of labour at term with a Foley catheter compared to vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel (PROBAAT trial)
Article first published online: 26 MAR 2013
© 2013 The Authors BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology © 2013 RCOG
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Volume 120, Issue 8, pages 987–995, July 2013
How to Cite
Cost-effectiveness of induction of labour at term with a Foley catheter compared to vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel (PROBAAT trial). BJOG 2013; DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.12221., , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .
- Issue published online: 11 JUN 2013
- Article first published online: 26 MAR 2013
- Manuscript Accepted: 20 FEB 2013
- Foley catheter;
- induction of labour;
- randomised controlled trial
To assess the economic consequences of labour induction with Foley catheter compared to prostaglandin E2 gel.
Economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial.
Obstetric departments of one university and 11 teaching hospitals in the Netherlands.
Women scheduled for labour induction with a singleton pregnancy in cephalic presentation at term, intact membranes and an unfavourable cervix; and without previous caesarean section.
Cost-effectiveness analysis from a hospital perspective.
Main outcome measures
We estimated direct medical costs associated with healthcare utilisation from randomisation to 6 weeks postpartum. For caesarean section rate, and maternal and neonatal morbidity we calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, which represent the costs to prevent one of these adverse outcomes.
Mean costs per woman in the Foley catheter group (n = 411) and in the prostaglandin E2 gel group (n = 408), were €3297 versus €3075, respectively, with an average difference of €222 (95% confidence interval −€157 to €633). In the Foley catheter group we observed higher costs due to longer labour ward occupation and less cost related to induction material and neonatal admissions. Foley catheter induction showed a comparable caesarean section rate compared with prostaglandin induction, therefore the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was not informative. Foley induction resulted in fewer neonatal admissions (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio €2708) and asphyxia/postpartum haemorrhage (incremental cost-effectiveness ratios €5257) compared with prostaglandin induction.
Foley catheter and prostaglandin E2 labour induction generate comparable costs.