Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review
Background Training healthcare providers in Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) has been shown to be effective in improving their capacity to provide this critical care package for mothers and babies. However, little is known about the costs and cost-effectiveness of such training. Understanding costs a...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2017 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© The Author(s). 2017 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: BMC pregnancy and childbirth - London : BioMed Central, 2001, 17(2017), 1 vom: 04. Dez. |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:17 ; year:2017 ; number:1 ; day:04 ; month:12 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
SPR027588955 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR027588955 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230519222907.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 201007s2017 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR027588955 | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s12884-017-1586-z-e | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2017 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © The Author(s). 2017 | ||
| 520 | |a Background Training healthcare providers in Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) has been shown to be effective in improving their capacity to provide this critical care package for mothers and babies. However, little is known about the costs and cost-effectiveness of such training. Understanding costs and cost-effectiveness is essential in guaranteeing value-for-money in healthcare spending. This study systematically reviewed the available literature on cost and cost-effectiveness of EmOC trainings. Methods Peer-reviewed and grey literature was searched for relevant papers published after 1990. Studies were included if they described an economic evaluation of EmOC training and the training cost data were available. Two reviewers independently searched, screened, and selected studies that met the inclusion criteria, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Quality of studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. For comparability, all costs in local currency were converted to International dollar (I$) equivalents using purchasing power parity conversion factors. The cost per training per participant was calculated. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise the available evidence on cost effectiveness. Results Fourteen studies (five full and nine partial economic evaluations) met the inclusion criteria. All five and two of the nine partial economic evaluations were of high quality. The majority of studies (13/14) were from low- and middle-income countries. Training equipment, per diems and resource person allowance were the most expensive components. Cost of training per person per day ranged from I$33 to I$90 when accommodation was required and from I$5 to I$21 when training was facility-based. Cost-effectiveness of training was assessed in 5 studies with differing measures of effectiveness (knowledge, skills, procedure cost and lives saved) making comparison difficult. Conclusions Economic evaluations of EmOC training are limited. There is a need to scale-up and standardise processes that capture both cost and effectiveness of training and to agree on suitable economic evaluation models that allow for comparability across settings. Trial registration PROSPERO_CRD42016041911. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Emergency obstetric care |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Training |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Economic evaluation |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Cost analysis |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Cost-effectiveness analysis |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Cost-utility analysis |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Cost-benefit analysis |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Value-for-money |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Wilson-Jones, Megan |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Madaj, Barbara |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a van den Broek, Nynke |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t BMC pregnancy and childbirth |d London : BioMed Central, 2001 |g 17(2017), 1 vom: 04. Dez. |w (DE-627)335489087 |w (DE-600)2059869-5 |x 1471-2393 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:17 |g year:2017 |g number:1 |g day:04 |g month:12 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 17 |j 2017 |e 1 |b 04 |c 12 | ||
| author_variant |
a b t abt m w j mwj b m bm d b n v dbn dbnv |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:14712393:2017----::cnmcvlainfmrecosercaerii |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2017 |
| publishDate |
2017 |
| allfields |
10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z doi (DE-627)SPR027588955 (SPR)s12884-017-1586-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi verfasserin aut Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review 2017 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s). 2017 Background Training healthcare providers in Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) has been shown to be effective in improving their capacity to provide this critical care package for mothers and babies. However, little is known about the costs and cost-effectiveness of such training. Understanding costs and cost-effectiveness is essential in guaranteeing value-for-money in healthcare spending. This study systematically reviewed the available literature on cost and cost-effectiveness of EmOC trainings. Methods Peer-reviewed and grey literature was searched for relevant papers published after 1990. Studies were included if they described an economic evaluation of EmOC training and the training cost data were available. Two reviewers independently searched, screened, and selected studies that met the inclusion criteria, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Quality of studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. For comparability, all costs in local currency were converted to International dollar (I$) equivalents using purchasing power parity conversion factors. The cost per training per participant was calculated. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise the available evidence on cost effectiveness. Results Fourteen studies (five full and nine partial economic evaluations) met the inclusion criteria. All five and two of the nine partial economic evaluations were of high quality. The majority of studies (13/14) were from low- and middle-income countries. Training equipment, per diems and resource person allowance were the most expensive components. Cost of training per person per day ranged from I$33 to I$90 when accommodation was required and from I$5 to I$21 when training was facility-based. Cost-effectiveness of training was assessed in 5 studies with differing measures of effectiveness (knowledge, skills, procedure cost and lives saved) making comparison difficult. Conclusions Economic evaluations of EmOC training are limited. There is a need to scale-up and standardise processes that capture both cost and effectiveness of training and to agree on suitable economic evaluation models that allow for comparability across settings. Trial registration PROSPERO_CRD42016041911. Emergency obstetric care (dpeaa)DE-He213 Training (dpeaa)DE-He213 Economic evaluation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-effectiveness analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-utility analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-benefit analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Value-for-money (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wilson-Jones, Megan aut Madaj, Barbara aut van den Broek, Nynke aut Enthalten in BMC pregnancy and childbirth London : BioMed Central, 2001 17(2017), 1 vom: 04. Dez. (DE-627)335489087 (DE-600)2059869-5 1471-2393 nnns volume:17 year:2017 number:1 day:04 month:12 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 17 2017 1 04 12 |
| spelling |
10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z doi (DE-627)SPR027588955 (SPR)s12884-017-1586-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi verfasserin aut Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review 2017 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s). 2017 Background Training healthcare providers in Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) has been shown to be effective in improving their capacity to provide this critical care package for mothers and babies. However, little is known about the costs and cost-effectiveness of such training. Understanding costs and cost-effectiveness is essential in guaranteeing value-for-money in healthcare spending. This study systematically reviewed the available literature on cost and cost-effectiveness of EmOC trainings. Methods Peer-reviewed and grey literature was searched for relevant papers published after 1990. Studies were included if they described an economic evaluation of EmOC training and the training cost data were available. Two reviewers independently searched, screened, and selected studies that met the inclusion criteria, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Quality of studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. For comparability, all costs in local currency were converted to International dollar (I$) equivalents using purchasing power parity conversion factors. The cost per training per participant was calculated. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise the available evidence on cost effectiveness. Results Fourteen studies (five full and nine partial economic evaluations) met the inclusion criteria. All five and two of the nine partial economic evaluations were of high quality. The majority of studies (13/14) were from low- and middle-income countries. Training equipment, per diems and resource person allowance were the most expensive components. Cost of training per person per day ranged from I$33 to I$90 when accommodation was required and from I$5 to I$21 when training was facility-based. Cost-effectiveness of training was assessed in 5 studies with differing measures of effectiveness (knowledge, skills, procedure cost and lives saved) making comparison difficult. Conclusions Economic evaluations of EmOC training are limited. There is a need to scale-up and standardise processes that capture both cost and effectiveness of training and to agree on suitable economic evaluation models that allow for comparability across settings. Trial registration PROSPERO_CRD42016041911. Emergency obstetric care (dpeaa)DE-He213 Training (dpeaa)DE-He213 Economic evaluation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-effectiveness analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-utility analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-benefit analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Value-for-money (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wilson-Jones, Megan aut Madaj, Barbara aut van den Broek, Nynke aut Enthalten in BMC pregnancy and childbirth London : BioMed Central, 2001 17(2017), 1 vom: 04. Dez. (DE-627)335489087 (DE-600)2059869-5 1471-2393 nnns volume:17 year:2017 number:1 day:04 month:12 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 17 2017 1 04 12 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z doi (DE-627)SPR027588955 (SPR)s12884-017-1586-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi verfasserin aut Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review 2017 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s). 2017 Background Training healthcare providers in Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) has been shown to be effective in improving their capacity to provide this critical care package for mothers and babies. However, little is known about the costs and cost-effectiveness of such training. Understanding costs and cost-effectiveness is essential in guaranteeing value-for-money in healthcare spending. This study systematically reviewed the available literature on cost and cost-effectiveness of EmOC trainings. Methods Peer-reviewed and grey literature was searched for relevant papers published after 1990. Studies were included if they described an economic evaluation of EmOC training and the training cost data were available. Two reviewers independently searched, screened, and selected studies that met the inclusion criteria, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Quality of studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. For comparability, all costs in local currency were converted to International dollar (I$) equivalents using purchasing power parity conversion factors. The cost per training per participant was calculated. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise the available evidence on cost effectiveness. Results Fourteen studies (five full and nine partial economic evaluations) met the inclusion criteria. All five and two of the nine partial economic evaluations were of high quality. The majority of studies (13/14) were from low- and middle-income countries. Training equipment, per diems and resource person allowance were the most expensive components. Cost of training per person per day ranged from I$33 to I$90 when accommodation was required and from I$5 to I$21 when training was facility-based. Cost-effectiveness of training was assessed in 5 studies with differing measures of effectiveness (knowledge, skills, procedure cost and lives saved) making comparison difficult. Conclusions Economic evaluations of EmOC training are limited. There is a need to scale-up and standardise processes that capture both cost and effectiveness of training and to agree on suitable economic evaluation models that allow for comparability across settings. Trial registration PROSPERO_CRD42016041911. Emergency obstetric care (dpeaa)DE-He213 Training (dpeaa)DE-He213 Economic evaluation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-effectiveness analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-utility analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-benefit analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Value-for-money (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wilson-Jones, Megan aut Madaj, Barbara aut van den Broek, Nynke aut Enthalten in BMC pregnancy and childbirth London : BioMed Central, 2001 17(2017), 1 vom: 04. Dez. (DE-627)335489087 (DE-600)2059869-5 1471-2393 nnns volume:17 year:2017 number:1 day:04 month:12 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 17 2017 1 04 12 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z doi (DE-627)SPR027588955 (SPR)s12884-017-1586-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi verfasserin aut Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review 2017 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s). 2017 Background Training healthcare providers in Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) has been shown to be effective in improving their capacity to provide this critical care package for mothers and babies. However, little is known about the costs and cost-effectiveness of such training. Understanding costs and cost-effectiveness is essential in guaranteeing value-for-money in healthcare spending. This study systematically reviewed the available literature on cost and cost-effectiveness of EmOC trainings. Methods Peer-reviewed and grey literature was searched for relevant papers published after 1990. Studies were included if they described an economic evaluation of EmOC training and the training cost data were available. Two reviewers independently searched, screened, and selected studies that met the inclusion criteria, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Quality of studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. For comparability, all costs in local currency were converted to International dollar (I$) equivalents using purchasing power parity conversion factors. The cost per training per participant was calculated. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise the available evidence on cost effectiveness. Results Fourteen studies (five full and nine partial economic evaluations) met the inclusion criteria. All five and two of the nine partial economic evaluations were of high quality. The majority of studies (13/14) were from low- and middle-income countries. Training equipment, per diems and resource person allowance were the most expensive components. Cost of training per person per day ranged from I$33 to I$90 when accommodation was required and from I$5 to I$21 when training was facility-based. Cost-effectiveness of training was assessed in 5 studies with differing measures of effectiveness (knowledge, skills, procedure cost and lives saved) making comparison difficult. Conclusions Economic evaluations of EmOC training are limited. There is a need to scale-up and standardise processes that capture both cost and effectiveness of training and to agree on suitable economic evaluation models that allow for comparability across settings. Trial registration PROSPERO_CRD42016041911. Emergency obstetric care (dpeaa)DE-He213 Training (dpeaa)DE-He213 Economic evaluation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-effectiveness analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-utility analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-benefit analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Value-for-money (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wilson-Jones, Megan aut Madaj, Barbara aut van den Broek, Nynke aut Enthalten in BMC pregnancy and childbirth London : BioMed Central, 2001 17(2017), 1 vom: 04. Dez. (DE-627)335489087 (DE-600)2059869-5 1471-2393 nnns volume:17 year:2017 number:1 day:04 month:12 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 17 2017 1 04 12 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z doi (DE-627)SPR027588955 (SPR)s12884-017-1586-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi verfasserin aut Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review 2017 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s). 2017 Background Training healthcare providers in Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) has been shown to be effective in improving their capacity to provide this critical care package for mothers and babies. However, little is known about the costs and cost-effectiveness of such training. Understanding costs and cost-effectiveness is essential in guaranteeing value-for-money in healthcare spending. This study systematically reviewed the available literature on cost and cost-effectiveness of EmOC trainings. Methods Peer-reviewed and grey literature was searched for relevant papers published after 1990. Studies were included if they described an economic evaluation of EmOC training and the training cost data were available. Two reviewers independently searched, screened, and selected studies that met the inclusion criteria, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Quality of studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. For comparability, all costs in local currency were converted to International dollar (I$) equivalents using purchasing power parity conversion factors. The cost per training per participant was calculated. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise the available evidence on cost effectiveness. Results Fourteen studies (five full and nine partial economic evaluations) met the inclusion criteria. All five and two of the nine partial economic evaluations were of high quality. The majority of studies (13/14) were from low- and middle-income countries. Training equipment, per diems and resource person allowance were the most expensive components. Cost of training per person per day ranged from I$33 to I$90 when accommodation was required and from I$5 to I$21 when training was facility-based. Cost-effectiveness of training was assessed in 5 studies with differing measures of effectiveness (knowledge, skills, procedure cost and lives saved) making comparison difficult. Conclusions Economic evaluations of EmOC training are limited. There is a need to scale-up and standardise processes that capture both cost and effectiveness of training and to agree on suitable economic evaluation models that allow for comparability across settings. Trial registration PROSPERO_CRD42016041911. Emergency obstetric care (dpeaa)DE-He213 Training (dpeaa)DE-He213 Economic evaluation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-effectiveness analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-utility analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-benefit analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Value-for-money (dpeaa)DE-He213 Wilson-Jones, Megan aut Madaj, Barbara aut van den Broek, Nynke aut Enthalten in BMC pregnancy and childbirth London : BioMed Central, 2001 17(2017), 1 vom: 04. Dez. (DE-627)335489087 (DE-600)2059869-5 1471-2393 nnns volume:17 year:2017 number:1 day:04 month:12 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 17 2017 1 04 12 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in BMC pregnancy and childbirth 17(2017), 1 vom: 04. Dez. volume:17 year:2017 number:1 day:04 month:12 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in BMC pregnancy and childbirth 17(2017), 1 vom: 04. Dez. volume:17 year:2017 number:1 day:04 month:12 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Emergency obstetric care Training Economic evaluation Cost analysis Cost-effectiveness analysis Cost-utility analysis Cost-benefit analysis Value-for-money |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
| container_title |
BMC pregnancy and childbirth |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi @@aut@@ Wilson-Jones, Megan @@aut@@ Madaj, Barbara @@aut@@ van den Broek, Nynke @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2017-12-04T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
335489087 |
| id |
SPR027588955 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR027588955</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519222907.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2017 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR027588955</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s12884-017-1586-z-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s). 2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Training healthcare providers in Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) has been shown to be effective in improving their capacity to provide this critical care package for mothers and babies. However, little is known about the costs and cost-effectiveness of such training. Understanding costs and cost-effectiveness is essential in guaranteeing value-for-money in healthcare spending. This study systematically reviewed the available literature on cost and cost-effectiveness of EmOC trainings. Methods Peer-reviewed and grey literature was searched for relevant papers published after 1990. Studies were included if they described an economic evaluation of EmOC training and the training cost data were available. Two reviewers independently searched, screened, and selected studies that met the inclusion criteria, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Quality of studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. For comparability, all costs in local currency were converted to International dollar (I$) equivalents using purchasing power parity conversion factors. The cost per training per participant was calculated. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise the available evidence on cost effectiveness. Results Fourteen studies (five full and nine partial economic evaluations) met the inclusion criteria. All five and two of the nine partial economic evaluations were of high quality. The majority of studies (13/14) were from low- and middle-income countries. Training equipment, per diems and resource person allowance were the most expensive components. Cost of training per person per day ranged from I$33 to I$90 when accommodation was required and from I$5 to I$21 when training was facility-based. Cost-effectiveness of training was assessed in 5 studies with differing measures of effectiveness (knowledge, skills, procedure cost and lives saved) making comparison difficult. Conclusions Economic evaluations of EmOC training are limited. There is a need to scale-up and standardise processes that capture both cost and effectiveness of training and to agree on suitable economic evaluation models that allow for comparability across settings. Trial registration PROSPERO_CRD42016041911.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Emergency obstetric care</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Training</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Economic evaluation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cost analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cost-effectiveness analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cost-utility analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cost-benefit analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Value-for-money</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wilson-Jones, Megan</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Madaj, Barbara</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">van den Broek, Nynke</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC pregnancy and childbirth</subfield><subfield code="d">London : BioMed Central, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">17(2017), 1 vom: 04. Dez.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)335489087</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2059869-5</subfield><subfield code="x">1471-2393</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:17</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2017</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:04</subfield><subfield code="g">month:12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">17</subfield><subfield code="j">2017</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">04</subfield><subfield code="c">12</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi |
| spellingShingle |
Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi misc Emergency obstetric care misc Training misc Economic evaluation misc Cost analysis misc Cost-effectiveness analysis misc Cost-utility analysis misc Cost-benefit analysis misc Value-for-money Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review |
| authorStr |
Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)335489087 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
springer |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1471-2393 |
| topic_title |
Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review Emergency obstetric care (dpeaa)DE-He213 Training (dpeaa)DE-He213 Economic evaluation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-effectiveness analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-utility analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cost-benefit analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Value-for-money (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
| topic |
misc Emergency obstetric care misc Training misc Economic evaluation misc Cost analysis misc Cost-effectiveness analysis misc Cost-utility analysis misc Cost-benefit analysis misc Value-for-money |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc Emergency obstetric care misc Training misc Economic evaluation misc Cost analysis misc Cost-effectiveness analysis misc Cost-utility analysis misc Cost-benefit analysis misc Value-for-money |
| topic_browse |
misc Emergency obstetric care misc Training misc Economic evaluation misc Cost analysis misc Cost-effectiveness analysis misc Cost-utility analysis misc Cost-benefit analysis misc Value-for-money |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
BMC pregnancy and childbirth |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
335489087 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
BMC pregnancy and childbirth |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)335489087 (DE-600)2059869-5 |
| title |
Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR027588955 (SPR)s12884-017-1586-z-e |
| title_full |
Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review |
| author_sort |
Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi |
| journal |
BMC pregnancy and childbirth |
| journalStr |
BMC pregnancy and childbirth |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
true |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2017 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| author_browse |
Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi Wilson-Jones, Megan Madaj, Barbara van den Broek, Nynke |
| container_volume |
17 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z |
| title_sort |
economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review |
| title_auth |
Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review |
| abstract |
Background Training healthcare providers in Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) has been shown to be effective in improving their capacity to provide this critical care package for mothers and babies. However, little is known about the costs and cost-effectiveness of such training. Understanding costs and cost-effectiveness is essential in guaranteeing value-for-money in healthcare spending. This study systematically reviewed the available literature on cost and cost-effectiveness of EmOC trainings. Methods Peer-reviewed and grey literature was searched for relevant papers published after 1990. Studies were included if they described an economic evaluation of EmOC training and the training cost data were available. Two reviewers independently searched, screened, and selected studies that met the inclusion criteria, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Quality of studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. For comparability, all costs in local currency were converted to International dollar (I$) equivalents using purchasing power parity conversion factors. The cost per training per participant was calculated. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise the available evidence on cost effectiveness. Results Fourteen studies (five full and nine partial economic evaluations) met the inclusion criteria. All five and two of the nine partial economic evaluations were of high quality. The majority of studies (13/14) were from low- and middle-income countries. Training equipment, per diems and resource person allowance were the most expensive components. Cost of training per person per day ranged from I$33 to I$90 when accommodation was required and from I$5 to I$21 when training was facility-based. Cost-effectiveness of training was assessed in 5 studies with differing measures of effectiveness (knowledge, skills, procedure cost and lives saved) making comparison difficult. Conclusions Economic evaluations of EmOC training are limited. There is a need to scale-up and standardise processes that capture both cost and effectiveness of training and to agree on suitable economic evaluation models that allow for comparability across settings. Trial registration PROSPERO_CRD42016041911. © The Author(s). 2017 |
| abstractGer |
Background Training healthcare providers in Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) has been shown to be effective in improving their capacity to provide this critical care package for mothers and babies. However, little is known about the costs and cost-effectiveness of such training. Understanding costs and cost-effectiveness is essential in guaranteeing value-for-money in healthcare spending. This study systematically reviewed the available literature on cost and cost-effectiveness of EmOC trainings. Methods Peer-reviewed and grey literature was searched for relevant papers published after 1990. Studies were included if they described an economic evaluation of EmOC training and the training cost data were available. Two reviewers independently searched, screened, and selected studies that met the inclusion criteria, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Quality of studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. For comparability, all costs in local currency were converted to International dollar (I$) equivalents using purchasing power parity conversion factors. The cost per training per participant was calculated. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise the available evidence on cost effectiveness. Results Fourteen studies (five full and nine partial economic evaluations) met the inclusion criteria. All five and two of the nine partial economic evaluations were of high quality. The majority of studies (13/14) were from low- and middle-income countries. Training equipment, per diems and resource person allowance were the most expensive components. Cost of training per person per day ranged from I$33 to I$90 when accommodation was required and from I$5 to I$21 when training was facility-based. Cost-effectiveness of training was assessed in 5 studies with differing measures of effectiveness (knowledge, skills, procedure cost and lives saved) making comparison difficult. Conclusions Economic evaluations of EmOC training are limited. There is a need to scale-up and standardise processes that capture both cost and effectiveness of training and to agree on suitable economic evaluation models that allow for comparability across settings. Trial registration PROSPERO_CRD42016041911. © The Author(s). 2017 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Background Training healthcare providers in Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) has been shown to be effective in improving their capacity to provide this critical care package for mothers and babies. However, little is known about the costs and cost-effectiveness of such training. Understanding costs and cost-effectiveness is essential in guaranteeing value-for-money in healthcare spending. This study systematically reviewed the available literature on cost and cost-effectiveness of EmOC trainings. Methods Peer-reviewed and grey literature was searched for relevant papers published after 1990. Studies were included if they described an economic evaluation of EmOC training and the training cost data were available. Two reviewers independently searched, screened, and selected studies that met the inclusion criteria, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Quality of studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. For comparability, all costs in local currency were converted to International dollar (I$) equivalents using purchasing power parity conversion factors. The cost per training per participant was calculated. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise the available evidence on cost effectiveness. Results Fourteen studies (five full and nine partial economic evaluations) met the inclusion criteria. All five and two of the nine partial economic evaluations were of high quality. The majority of studies (13/14) were from low- and middle-income countries. Training equipment, per diems and resource person allowance were the most expensive components. Cost of training per person per day ranged from I$33 to I$90 when accommodation was required and from I$5 to I$21 when training was facility-based. Cost-effectiveness of training was assessed in 5 studies with differing measures of effectiveness (knowledge, skills, procedure cost and lives saved) making comparison difficult. Conclusions Economic evaluations of EmOC training are limited. There is a need to scale-up and standardise processes that capture both cost and effectiveness of training and to agree on suitable economic evaluation models that allow for comparability across settings. Trial registration PROSPERO_CRD42016041911. © The Author(s). 2017 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
| container_issue |
1 |
| title_short |
Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review |
| url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Wilson-Jones, Megan Madaj, Barbara van den Broek, Nynke |
| author2Str |
Wilson-Jones, Megan Madaj, Barbara van den Broek, Nynke |
| ppnlink |
335489087 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
true |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T13:48:53.207Z |
| _version_ |
1803565959177306112 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR027588955</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519222907.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2017 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR027588955</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s12884-017-1586-z-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Banke-Thomas, Aduragbemi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Economic evaluation of emergency obstetric care training: a systematic review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s). 2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Training healthcare providers in Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) has been shown to be effective in improving their capacity to provide this critical care package for mothers and babies. However, little is known about the costs and cost-effectiveness of such training. Understanding costs and cost-effectiveness is essential in guaranteeing value-for-money in healthcare spending. This study systematically reviewed the available literature on cost and cost-effectiveness of EmOC trainings. Methods Peer-reviewed and grey literature was searched for relevant papers published after 1990. Studies were included if they described an economic evaluation of EmOC training and the training cost data were available. Two reviewers independently searched, screened, and selected studies that met the inclusion criteria, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Quality of studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. For comparability, all costs in local currency were converted to International dollar (I$) equivalents using purchasing power parity conversion factors. The cost per training per participant was calculated. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise the available evidence on cost effectiveness. Results Fourteen studies (five full and nine partial economic evaluations) met the inclusion criteria. All five and two of the nine partial economic evaluations were of high quality. The majority of studies (13/14) were from low- and middle-income countries. Training equipment, per diems and resource person allowance were the most expensive components. Cost of training per person per day ranged from I$33 to I$90 when accommodation was required and from I$5 to I$21 when training was facility-based. Cost-effectiveness of training was assessed in 5 studies with differing measures of effectiveness (knowledge, skills, procedure cost and lives saved) making comparison difficult. Conclusions Economic evaluations of EmOC training are limited. There is a need to scale-up and standardise processes that capture both cost and effectiveness of training and to agree on suitable economic evaluation models that allow for comparability across settings. Trial registration PROSPERO_CRD42016041911.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Emergency obstetric care</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Training</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Economic evaluation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cost analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cost-effectiveness analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cost-utility analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cost-benefit analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Value-for-money</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wilson-Jones, Megan</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Madaj, Barbara</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">van den Broek, Nynke</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC pregnancy and childbirth</subfield><subfield code="d">London : BioMed Central, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">17(2017), 1 vom: 04. Dez.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)335489087</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2059869-5</subfield><subfield code="x">1471-2393</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:17</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2017</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:04</subfield><subfield code="g">month:12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1586-z</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">17</subfield><subfield code="j">2017</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">04</subfield><subfield code="c">12</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.399727 |