RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the comparative health and economic outcomes associated with three alternative first-trimester abortion techniques in Mexico City and to examine the policy implications of increasing access to safe abortion modalities within a restrictive setting. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING: Mexico City. POPULATION: Reproductive-aged women with unintended pregnancy seeking first-trimester abortion. METHODS: Synthesising the best available data, a computer-based model simulates induced abortion and its potential complications and is used to assess the cost-effectiveness of alternative safe modalities for first-trimester pregnancy termination: (1) hospital-based dilatation and curettage (D&C), (2) hospital-based manual vacuum aspiration (MVA), (3) clinic-based MVA and (4) medical abortion using vaginal misoprostol. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of complications, lifetime costs, life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy. RESULTS: In comparison to the magnitude of health gains associated with all safe abortion modalities, the relative differences between strategies were more pronounced in terms of their economic costs. Assuming all options were equally available, clinic-based MVA was the least costly and most effective. Medical abortion with misoprostol provided comparable benefits to D&C, but cost substantially less. Enhanced access to safe abortion was always more influential than shifting between safe abortion modalities. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the provision of safe abortion is cost-effective and will result in reduced complications, decreased mortality and substantial cost savings compared with unsafe abortion. In Mexico City, shifting from a practice of hospital-based D&C to clinic-based MVA and enhancing access to medical abortion will have the best chance to minimise abortion-related morbidity and mortality.
Assuntos
Aborto Induzido/economia , Abortivos não Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Abortivos não Esteroides/economia , Aborto Induzido/efeitos adversos , Aborto Induzido/métodos , Adulto , Análise Custo-Benefício , Dilatação e Curetagem/efeitos adversos , Dilatação e Curetagem/economia , Feminino , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Gastos em Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , México , Misoprostol/efeitos adversos , Misoprostol/economia , Modelos Econométricos , Gravidez , Primeiro Trimestre da Gravidez , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Curetagem a Vácuo/efeitos adversos , Curetagem a Vácuo/economiaRESUMO
A randomized, double-blind, prospective study was performed to determine the effects of perioperative administration of morphine or methadone on postoperative analgesic requirements and pain scores in 35 children aged 3 to 7 years undergoing major surgery. After a standardized induction of anesthesia, methadone or morphine, 0.2 mg/kg, was blindly administered, and supplemental doses were titrated to achieve comfort in the recovery room. Pain was assessed during the next 36 hours with a combination of validated behavioral and self-report measures. Patients in the methadone group required fewer supplemental opioid analgesic drugs during the next 36 hours, and reported lower pain scores. No patient had prolonged emergence from anesthesia, and no patient required naloxone or postoperative ventilatory assistance. No major adverse events occurred. We conclude that perioperative intravenous administration of methadone is an effective, inexpensive, and technologically simple means for providing prolonged analgesia for children after surgery.