Cost analysis of teoae-based universal newborn hearing screening

The universal newborn hearing screening in Brazil: From identification to intervention

“…-The wide variation in the estimation of screened newborns, from 385 to 54,000 newborns considered for analysis [13][14][15][16]. -The items considered for analysis are diverse.…”

“…However, some items are not considered despite being important for a true cost analysis and cost effectiveness of the program. In this context, cost of diagnostics [13], tracking cost [15], equipment amortization [16], and none of them considers expenses with graphic material. -The use of different protocols (behavioral and electrophysiological) and the implication of universal or at risk newborn hearing screening [17][18][19].…”

The universal newborn hearing screening program at the University Hospital of Ferrara: Focus on costs and software solutions

“…So far, only a few U.S. studies have evaluated the cost or costeffectiveness of screening programs and literature data concerning the E.U. countries are missing; the reported estimated costs vary from $13 to $33 per infant, mainly depending on the salary of the persons involved in the program [25,[38][39][40][41][42][43]. We estimated the screening costs of our UNHS project, using two simple scenarios (showed in Table 2A and B), adopting an analysis model similar to that already used by other authors [24,43].…”

Beyond Efficacy and Effectiveness: Conducting Economic Analyses During Clinical Trials

“…To the best of our knowledge, no studies of this type have been published in the dysphagia literature. Literature searches using the subject terms ''cost'' and ''cost studies'' in conjunction with ''dysphagia/dysphagia research'' ''speech/speech research,'' ''hearing/hearing research,'' and ''language/language research'' for publications during the past ten years produced one study describing the costs of dental prosthetics [7], two studies comparing costs of newborn hearing screening protocols [8,9], a review article discussing economic terminology in otolaryngology publications [10], and a bibliography and glossary on diagnosis related groups (DRG) prospective pricing [11]. Thus, despite the increasing interest and emphasis on cost in health care, we could find no evidence of previous studies on which to base study design, select types of costs to be tracked, or compare results in the area of dysphagia.…”