Universal cervical‐length screening to prevent preterm birth: a cost‐effectiveness analysis

Abstract

To determine whether routine measurement of second-trimester transvaginal cervical length by ultrasound in low-risk singleton pregnancies is a cost-effective strategy. We developed a decision analysis model to compare the cost-effectiveness of two strategies for identifying pregnancies at risk for preterm birth: (1) no routine cervical length screening and (2) a single routine transvaginal cervical length measurement at 18-24 weeks' gestation. In our model, women identified as being at increased risk (cervical length < 1.5 cm) for preterm birth would be offered daily vaginal progesterone supplementation. We assumed that vaginal progesterone reduces preterm birth at < 34 weeks' gestation by 45%. We also assumed that a decreased cervical length could result in additional costs (ultrasound scans, inpatient admission) without significantly improved neonatal outcomes. The main outcome measure was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Our model predicts that routine cervical-length screening is a dominant strategy when compared to routine care. For every 100,000 women screened, $12,119,947 can be potentially saved (in 2010 US dollars) and 423.9 quality-adjusted life-years could be gained. Additionally, we estimate that 22 cases of neonatal death or long-term neurologic deficits could be prevented per 100,000 women screened. Screening remained cost-effective but was no longer the dominant strategy when cervical-length ultrasound measurement costs exceeded $187 or when vaginal progesterone reduced delivery risk at < 34 weeks by less than 20%. In low-risk pregnancies, universal transvaginal cervical length ultrasound screening appears to be a cost-effective strategy under a wide range of clinical circumstances (varied preterm birth rates, predictive values of a shortened cervix and costs).