Foley catheter vs. oral misoprostol to induce labour among hypertensive women in India: A cost-consequence analysis alongside a clinical trial.

Simon Leigh, Paul Granby, Alan Haycox, Shuchita Mundle, Hillary Bracken, Vaishali Khedikar, Jayashree Mulik, Brian Faragher, Thomas Easterling, Mark A Turner, Zarko Alfirevic, Beverly Winikoff, Andrew D Weeks

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective

To determine the effectiveness and economic impact of two methods for induction of labour in hypertensive women, in low-resource settings.

Design

Cost-consequence analysis of a previously reported multicentre, parallel, open-label randomised trial.

Setting & population

A total of 602 women with a live fetus, aged ≥18 years requiring delivery for pre-eclampsia or hypertension, in two public hospitals in Nagpur, India.

Methods

We performed a formal economic evaluation alongside the INFORM clinical trial. Women were randomised to receive transcervical Foley catheterisation or oral misoprostol 25 mcg. Healthcare expenditure was calculated using a provider-side microcosting approach.

Main outcome measures

Rates of vaginal this delivery within 24 hours of induction, healthcare expenditure per completed treatment episode.

Results

Induction with oral misoprostol resulted in a (mean difference) $20.6USD reduction in healthcare expenditure [95% CI (−) $123.59 (−) $72.49], and improved achievement of vaginal delivery within 24 hours of induction, mean difference 10% [95% CI (−2 to 17.9%), P = 0.016]. Oxytocin administration time was reduced by 135.3 minutes [95% CI (84.4–186.2 minutes), P < 0.01] and caesarean sections by 9.1% [95% CI (1.1–17%), P = 0.025] for those receiving oral misoprostol. Following probabilistic sensitivity analysis, oral misoprostol was cost-saving in 63% of 5,000 bootstrap replications and achieved superior rates of vaginal delivery, delivery within 24 hours of induction and vaginal delivery within 24 hours of induction in 98.7%, 90.7%, and 99.4% of bootstrap simulations. Based on univariate threshold analysis, the unit price of oral misoprostol 25 mcg could feasibly increase 31-fold from $0.24 to $7.50 per 25 mcg tablet and remain cost-saving.

Conclusion

Compared to Foley catheterisation for the induction of high-risk hypertensive women, oral misoprostol improves rates of vaginal delivery within 24 hours of induction and may also reduce costs. Additional research performed in other low-resource settings is required to determine their relative cost-effectiveness.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1734-1742
Number of pages9
JournalBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Volume125
Issue number13
Early online date21 May 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 22 Jun 2018

Keywords

  • Cost-consequence
  • economics
  • hypertension
  • labour induction
  • low-resource settings
  • pre-eclampsia

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Foley catheter vs. oral misoprostol to induce labour among hypertensive women in India: A cost-consequence analysis alongside a clinical trial.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this