Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Jan-Feb;129(1):86-93.
doi: 10.1177/003335491412900113.

A public health economic assessment of hospitals' cost to screen newborns for critical congenital heart disease

Affiliations

A public health economic assessment of hospitals' cost to screen newborns for critical congenital heart disease

Cora Peterson et al. Public Health Rep. 2014 Jan-Feb.

Abstract

Objective: Critical congenital heart disease (CCHD) was recently added to the U.S. Recommended Uniform Screening Panel for newborns. This evaluation aimed to estimate screening time and hospital cost per newborn screened for CCHD using pulse oximetry as part of a public health economic assessment of CCHD screening.

Methods: A cost survey and time and motion study were conducted in well-newborn and special/intensive care nurseries in a random sample of seven birthing hospitals in New Jersey, where the state legislature mandated CCHD screening in 2011. The sample was stratified by hospital facility level, hospital birth census, and geographic location. At the time of the evaluation, all hospitals had conducted CCHD screening for at least four months.

Results: Mean screening time per newborn was 9.1 (standard deviation = 3.4) minutes. Hospitals' total mean estimated cost per newborn screened was $14.19 (in 2011 U.S. dollars), consisting of $7.36 in labor costs and $6.83 in equipment and supply costs.

Conclusions: This federal agency-state health department collaborative assessment is the first state-level analysis of time and hospital costs for CCHD screening using pulse oximetry conducted in the U.S. Hospitals' cost per newborn screened for CCHD with pulse oximetry is comparable with cost estimates of existing newborn screening tests. Hospitals' equipment costs varied substantially based on the pulse oximetry technology employed, with lower costs among hospitals that used reusable screening sensors. In combination with estimates of screening accuracy, effectiveness, and avoided costs, information from this evaluation suggests that CCHD screening is cost-effective.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Mahle WT, Martin GR, Beekman RH, 3rd, Morrow WR Section on Cardiology Cardiac Surgery Executive Committee. Endorsement of Health and Human Services recommendation for pulse oximetry screening for critical congenital heart disease. Pediatrics. 2012;129:190–2. - PubMed
    1. N.J. Pub. L. No. 2011 Ch. 74, C.26:2-111.3, C26:2-111.4 (2011)
    1. Mahle WT, Newburger JW, Matherne GP, Smith FC, Hoke TR, Koppel R, et al. Role of pulse oximetry in examining newborns for congenital heart disease: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association and American Academy of Pediatrics. Circulation. 2009;120:447–58. - PubMed
    1. Kemper AR, Mahle WT, Martin GR, Cooley WC, Kumar P, Morrow WR, et al. Strategies for implementing screening for critical congenital heart disease. Pediatrics. 2011;128:e1259–67. - PubMed
    1. Liske MR, Greeley CS, Law DJ, Reich JD, Morrow WR, Baldwin HS, et al. Report of the Tennessee Task Force on Screening Newborn Infants for Critical Congenital Heart Disease. Pediatrics. 2006;118:e1250–6. - PubMed