Cited by 80Reproductive Health and ContraceptionHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeReproductive System and Pregnancy

A cost-effectiveness analysis of surgical versus medical management of early pregnancy loss

Open access
Rausch, Mary, Lorch, Scott, Chung, Karine, Frederick, Margaret, Zhang, Jun, Barnhart, Kurt·2012·Fertility and Sterility

Abstract

Objective To determine the cost-effectiveness of medical and surgical management of early pregnancy loss.Design Analyses of cost, effectiveness, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and utilities of a multicenter trial with 652 women with first-trimester pregnancy failure randomized to medical or surgical management.Setting Analysis of data from a multicenter trial.Patient(s) Secondary analysis of a multicenter trial.Intervention(s) Cost-effectiveness analysis.Main outcome measure(s) Cost and effectiveness of competing treatment strategies.Result(s) Cost analysis of treatment demonstrates an increased cost of US$336 for 13% increased efficacy of surgical management. This analysis was sensitive to the probability of an extra office visit, the cost of the visit, and the probability of success. When the surgical arm is divided into outpatient manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) versus inpatient electric vacuum aspiration (EVA), there is an increased cost of $745 for EVA but a decreased cost of $202 for MVA compared with medical management. In general, MVA was found to be more cost-effective than medical management. For treatment of incomplete or inevitable abortion, medical management was found to be less costly and more efficacious. Utilities studies demonstrated that a patient would need to prefer surgery 14% less than medication for its treatment efficacy to be outweighed by the desire to avoid surgery.Conclusion(s) Surgical or medical management of early pregnancy failure can be cost effective, depending on the circumstances. Surgery is cost effective and more efficacious when performed in an outpatient setting. For incomplete or inevitable abortion, medical management is cost effective and more efficacious.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.11.044

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Women who experience recurrent miscarriage are themselves born with a significantly reduced birthweight.

    “Women who experience recurrent miscarriage are themselves born with a significantly reduced birthweight, 102”

    From Miscarriage matters: the epidemiological, physical, psychological, and economic costs of early pregnancy loss (2021) · cites this paper as [102]

    The Methods (Trial background; page unavailable) describe patients enrolled for management of early pregnancy loss, and the Discussion (page unavailable) compares treatment outcomes by miscarriage type. Neither passage addresses recurrent miscarriage in relation to the women's own birthweight; searches for that relationship and for low birthweight found no relevant passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 23 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rausch, M., Lorch, S., Chung, K., Frederick, M., Zhang, J., & Barnhart, K.
Affiliations
  • North Shore University Hospital (US)
  • Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (US)
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • Clinical Trials and Surveys Corporation (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Barnhart, Kurt
Venue
Fertility and Sterility
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-02
Volume
97
Issue
2
Pages
355-360.e1
ISSN
0015-0282 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1964143603
Cited by
80
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Fertility and Sterility (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K24HD060687, N01-HD-1-3324, N01-HD-1-3323, T32HD007440, N01-HD-1-3322, R01HD036455, N01-HD-1-3325, N01-HD 1-3321)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Reproductive System and Pregnancy
Keywords
early pregnancy loss, miscarriage, cost-effectiveness, medical management, surgical management, manual vacuum aspiration, incomplete abortion, inevitable abortion, treatment efficacy, patient preferences
MeSH terms
Abortifacient Agents, Nonsteroidal, Abortion, Spontaneous, Abortion, Induced, Ambulatory Surgical Procedures, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Female, Humans, Office Visits, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Trimester, First, United States, Vacuum Curettage, Drug Costs, Misoprostol, Treatment Outcome, Health Care Costs, Hospital Costs, Models, Economic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review