Journal article


Research Areas

No matching items found.

Publication Details

Author list: Javier CHF, Eduardo PJJ, Auxiliadora RB, Fernando CF
Publisher: Unknown
Publication year: 2010
Journal: Atencion Farmaceutica (1139-7357)
Volume number: 12
Issue number: 6
Start page: 359
End page: 368
Number of pages: 10
ISSN: 1139-7357
Languages: English-Great Britain (EN-GB)


Objective: To determine which one of the two forms of dinoprostone, endocervical gel and intrauterine device, at typical doses, has a better cost-effectiveness relation for cervix maturation before labor induction.Method: We designed a decision tree that captured the effects of drugs and their adverse events. The hospital's perspective was the one being used. The time horizon was less than a year No indirect or intangible costs were considered, only those direct health costs for each alternative (in 2010 Euros). We performed a univariate and bivariate sensitivity analysis by extensively changing the model's fundamental parameters around the basal situation, and proceeded to test the model's solidity by changing its structure.Results: 0.5 mg Prepidil endocervical gel administered twice a day is an option (C/E = 8.97) dominated by a 10 mg Propess (R) dose by vaginal way for cervix maturation before labor induction in nulliparous pregnant women (C/E = 1.46). The univariate and bivariate sensitivity analysis results of all tested parameters proved the model's robustness. The same results were obtained with the structural sensitivity analysis.Conclusion: The treatment of nulliparous pregnant women at term with immature uterine neck with a dose of 10mg Propess (R) of vaginal liberation (dino-prostone) showed a more favorable cost-effectiveness relation than two doses six hours apart of 0.5 mg Prepidil (R) endocervical gel (2.5 ml).


No matching items found.


No matching items found.

Last updated on 2019-23-08 at 11:15