Cargando…

The Cost-Effectiveness of Emergency Hormonal Contraception with Ulipristal Acetate versus Levonorgestrel for Minors in France

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ulipristal acetate and levonorgestrel in minors in France, and analyze whether it is worthwhile to provide ulipristal acetate to minors free of charge. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness of two emergency contraceptive methods was compared based on a deci...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Schmid, Ramona
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4589416/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26422259
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138990
_version_ 1782392789969928192
author Schmid, Ramona
author_facet Schmid, Ramona
author_sort Schmid, Ramona
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ulipristal acetate and levonorgestrel in minors in France, and analyze whether it is worthwhile to provide ulipristal acetate to minors free of charge. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness of two emergency contraceptive methods was compared based on a decision-analytical model. Pregnancy rates, outcomes of unintended pregnancies, and resource utilization were derived from the literature. Resources and their costs were considered until termination or a few days after delivery. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The cost of an unintended pregnancy in a French minor is estimated to be 1,630 € (range 1,330 € – 1,803 €). Almost 4 million € (3.1 € – 13.7 € million) in unintended pregnancy spending in 2010 could have been saved by the use of ulipristal acetate instead of levonorgestrel. The incremental cost of ulipristal acetate compared to levonorgestrel is 3.30 € per intake, or 418 € per pregnancy avoided (intake within 72 hours). In the intake within 24 hours subgroup, ulipristal acetate was found to be more efficacious at a lower cost compared to levonorgestrel. CONCLUSIONS: Ulipristal acetate dominates levonorgestrel when taken within 24 hours after unprotected intercourse, i.e., it is more effective at a lower cost. When taken within 72 hours, ulipristal acetate is a cost- effective alternative to levonorgestrel, given that the cost of avoiding an additional pregnancy with ulipristal acetate is less than the average cost of these pregnancies. In the light of these findings, it is worthwhile to provide free access to minors.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4589416
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45894162015-10-02 The Cost-Effectiveness of Emergency Hormonal Contraception with Ulipristal Acetate versus Levonorgestrel for Minors in France Schmid, Ramona PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ulipristal acetate and levonorgestrel in minors in France, and analyze whether it is worthwhile to provide ulipristal acetate to minors free of charge. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness of two emergency contraceptive methods was compared based on a decision-analytical model. Pregnancy rates, outcomes of unintended pregnancies, and resource utilization were derived from the literature. Resources and their costs were considered until termination or a few days after delivery. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The cost of an unintended pregnancy in a French minor is estimated to be 1,630 € (range 1,330 € – 1,803 €). Almost 4 million € (3.1 € – 13.7 € million) in unintended pregnancy spending in 2010 could have been saved by the use of ulipristal acetate instead of levonorgestrel. The incremental cost of ulipristal acetate compared to levonorgestrel is 3.30 € per intake, or 418 € per pregnancy avoided (intake within 72 hours). In the intake within 24 hours subgroup, ulipristal acetate was found to be more efficacious at a lower cost compared to levonorgestrel. CONCLUSIONS: Ulipristal acetate dominates levonorgestrel when taken within 24 hours after unprotected intercourse, i.e., it is more effective at a lower cost. When taken within 72 hours, ulipristal acetate is a cost- effective alternative to levonorgestrel, given that the cost of avoiding an additional pregnancy with ulipristal acetate is less than the average cost of these pregnancies. In the light of these findings, it is worthwhile to provide free access to minors. Public Library of Science 2015-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC4589416/ /pubmed/26422259 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138990 Text en © 2015 Ramona Schmid http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Schmid, Ramona
The Cost-Effectiveness of Emergency Hormonal Contraception with Ulipristal Acetate versus Levonorgestrel for Minors in France
title The Cost-Effectiveness of Emergency Hormonal Contraception with Ulipristal Acetate versus Levonorgestrel for Minors in France
title_full The Cost-Effectiveness of Emergency Hormonal Contraception with Ulipristal Acetate versus Levonorgestrel for Minors in France
title_fullStr The Cost-Effectiveness of Emergency Hormonal Contraception with Ulipristal Acetate versus Levonorgestrel for Minors in France
title_full_unstemmed The Cost-Effectiveness of Emergency Hormonal Contraception with Ulipristal Acetate versus Levonorgestrel for Minors in France
title_short The Cost-Effectiveness of Emergency Hormonal Contraception with Ulipristal Acetate versus Levonorgestrel for Minors in France
title_sort cost-effectiveness of emergency hormonal contraception with ulipristal acetate versus levonorgestrel for minors in france
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4589416/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26422259
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138990
work_keys_str_mv AT schmidramona thecosteffectivenessofemergencyhormonalcontraceptionwithulipristalacetateversuslevonorgestrelforminorsinfrance
AT schmidramona costeffectivenessofemergencyhormonalcontraceptionwithulipristalacetateversuslevonorgestrelforminorsinfrance