Abstract
Background Timely detection and treatment of postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) are crucial to prevent complications or death. A calibrated blood-collection drape can help provide objective, accurate, and early diagnosis of PPH and a treatment bundle can address delays or inconsistencies in the use of effective interventions.
Methods We conducted an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis alongside the E-MOTIVE trial, an international, parallel cluster-randomised trial with a baseline control phase, designed to assess a multi-component intervention for PPH in patients having vaginal delivery. We compared the E-MOTIVE intervention, which included a calibrated blood-collection drape for early detection of PPH and a bundle of first-response treatments (uterine massage, oxytocic drugs, tranexamic acid, intravenous fluids, examination, and escalation), with usual care. We used multilevel modelling to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios from the perspective of the public healthcare system for outcomes of cost per case of severe PPH (blood loss ≥1000 mL) prevented and cost per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted.
Results A total of 80 secondary-level hospitals across Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, and Tanzania, in which 210,132 patients underwent vaginal delivery, were randomly assigned to the E-MOTIVE group or the usual-care group. Among hospitals and patients with data, severe PPH was diagnosed in 1.6% of patients in the E-MOTIVE group and 4.3% of patients in the usual-care group (risk difference, -2.6%; 95% CI -3.1% to -2.1%). Mean DALYs per patient were lower for the E-MOTIVE group (-0.0027; 95% CI -0.0081 to 0.0029) whilst mean costs per patient were slightly higher compared with the usual-care group (0.30 USD; 95% CI -2.31 to 2.78). The E-MOTIVE intervention was deemed cost-effective at contemporary willingness-to-pay thresholds and remained cost-effective across the full range of sensitivity and country-level analyses.
Interpretation Use of a calibrated blood-collection drape for early detection of PPH and bundled first-response treatment is cost-effective and should be perceived by decision makers as a worthwhile use of healthcare budgets.
Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (NCT04341662).
Competing Interest Statement
GJH has consulted for Equalize Health, a not-for-profit health technology company. This did not influence the design, conduct or reporting of the research presented in this manuscript. The other authors have no interests to declare.
Clinical Trial
NCT04341662
Funding Statement
Funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval was granted by the University of Birmingham Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) ethics committee in the UK; the World Health Organization - Human Reproduction Programme (WHO-HRP) (approval for formative phase) in Switzerland; the Kenyatta National Hospital (KNH) - University of Nairobi (UoN) Ethics and Research Committee, the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI), and the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) in Kenya; the National Health Research Ethics Committee of Nigeria (NHREC) and National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) in Nigeria; the University of the Witwatersrand Human Research Ethics Committee (Medical), the Eastern Cape Department of Health - Eastern Cape Health Research Committee, the KwaZulu-Natal Department of Health - KZN Health Research Committee, and the University of Cape Town - Human Research Ethics Committee in South Africa; the Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences (MUHAS) - Senate Research and Publications Committee, and the National Institute for Medical Research in Tanzania.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Any data requests for the clinical data should be made to the corresponding author of the E-MOTIVE clinical paper. No additional data are available for this economic evaluation.
