SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

Benefits and harms of antenatal and newborn screening programmes in health economic assessments: the VALENTIA systematic review and qualitative investigation.

Rivero-Arias, O; Png, ME; White, A; Yang, M; Taylor-Phillips, S; Hinton, L; Boardman, F; McNiven, A; Fisher, J; Thilaganathan, B; et al. Rivero-Arias, O; Png, ME; White, A; Yang, M; Taylor-Phillips, S; Hinton, L; Boardman, F; McNiven, A; Fisher, J; Thilaganathan, B; Oddie, S; Slowther, A-M; Ratushnyak, S; Roberts, N; Shilton Osborne, J; Petrou, S (2024) Benefits and harms of antenatal and newborn screening programmes in health economic assessments: the VALENTIA systematic review and qualitative investigation. Health Technol Assess, 28 (25). pp. 1-180. ISSN 2046-4924 https://doi.org/10.3310/PYTK6591
SGUL Authors: Thilaganathan, Baskaran

[img]
Preview
PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (5MB) | Preview

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Health economic assessments are used to determine whether the resources needed to generate net benefit from an antenatal or newborn screening programme, driven by multiple benefits and harms, are justifiable. It is not known what benefits and harms have been adopted by economic evaluations assessing these programmes and whether they omit benefits and harms considered important to relevant stakeholders. OBJECTIVES: (1) To identify the benefits and harms adopted by health economic assessments in this area, and to assess how they have been measured and valued; (2) to identify attributes or relevance to stakeholders that ought to be considered in future economic assessments; and (3) to make recommendations about the benefits and harms that should be considered by these studies. DESIGN: Mixed methods combining systematic review and qualitative work. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW METHODS: We searched the published and grey literature from January 2000 to January 2021 using all major electronic databases. Economic evaluations of an antenatal or newborn screening programme in one or more Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries were considered eligible. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. We identified benefits and harms using an integrative descriptive analysis and constructed a thematic framework. QUALITATIVE METHODS: We conducted a meta-ethnography of the existing literature on newborn screening experiences, a secondary analysis of existing individual interviews related to antenatal or newborn screening or living with screened-for conditions, and a thematic analysis of primary data collected with stakeholders about their experiences with screening. RESULTS: The literature searches identified 52,244 articles and reports, and 336 unique studies were included. Thematic framework resulted in seven themes: (1) diagnosis of screened for condition, (2) life-years and health status adjustments, (3) treatment, (4) long-term costs, (5) overdiagnosis, (6) pregnancy loss and (7) spillover effects on family members. Diagnosis of screened-for condition (115, 47.5%), life-years and health status adjustments (90, 37.2%) and treatment (88, 36.4%) accounted for most of the benefits and harms evaluating antenatal screening. The same themes accounted for most of the benefits and harms included in studies assessing newborn screening. Long-term costs, overdiagnosis and spillover effects tended to be ignored. The wide-reaching family implications of screening were considered important to stakeholders. We observed good overlap between the thematic framework and the qualitative evidence. LIMITATIONS: Dual data extraction within the systematic literature review was not feasible due to the large number of studies included. It was difficult to recruit healthcare professionals in the stakeholder's interviews. CONCLUSIONS: There is no consistency in the selection of benefits and harms used in health economic assessments in this area, suggesting that additional methods guidance is needed. Our proposed thematic framework can be used to guide the development of future health economic assessments evaluating antenatal and newborn screening programmes. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020165236. FUNDING: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127489) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 25. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: Copyright © 2024 Rivero-Arias et al. This work was produced by Rivero-Arias et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. This is an Open Access publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0 licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. For attribution the title, original author(s), the publication source – NIHR Journals Library, and the DOI of the publication must be cited.
Keywords: ANTENATAL, BENEFITS, COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS, ECONOMIC EVALUATION, HARMS, NEWBORN, SCREENING PROGRAMME, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Neonatal Screening, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Female, Pregnancy, Qualitative Research, Technology Assessment, Biomedical, Prenatal Diagnosis, Quality-Adjusted Life Years, 0806 Information Systems, 0807 Library and Information Studies, 1117 Public Health and Health Services, Health Policy & Services
Journal or Publication Title: Health Technol Assess
ISSN: 2046-4924
Language: eng
Dates:
DateEvent
June 2024Published
December 2022Accepted
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0
Projects:
Project IDFunderFunder ID
NIHR127489Health Technology Assessment programmehttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000664
PubMed ID: 38938110
Go to PubMed abstract
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/116651
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.3310/PYTK6591

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item