To compare cost effectiveness of ‘Kangaroo Ward Care’ with ‘Intermediate intensive care’ in stable very low birth weight infants (birth weight < 1100 grams): a randomized control trial
To compare cost effectiveness of 'Kangaroo Ward Care' with 'Intermediate Intensive Care' in stable very low birth weight infants (birth weight < 1100 g).
This is the secondary analysis of the study in which we have analysed the cost effectiveness of 'Kangaroo ward care' (KWC) with 'Intermediate Intensive Care' (IIC). In this randomized control trial 141 infants (less than 1100 g and ≤ 32 weeks at birth) were enrolled, 71 were randomized to KWC group and 70 to IIC group, once the infant reached a weight of 1150 g. Infants randomized to KWC group were shifted to the Kangaroo ward immediately after randomization. Infants randomized to IIC group were shifted to the Kangaroo ward once the infant reached 1250 g.
Cost incurred by the patient in both the groups from the time of randomization to hospital discharge was calculated. The hospital costs were determined by "top-down" accounting methods and out of pocket expenditure of parents from standard "bottom-up" cost-accounting methods. There was significant reduction in neonatal charges in KWC group post-randomization {41591.9 ± 21712.8 INR vs 75388.8 ± 25532.2 INR; p < 0.001}). The separate "top-down" and "bottom-up" cost analysis showed that there was significant reduction of hospital and parents expenditure in KWC group when compared to IIC group (p < 0.001). There was significant saving of around 33800 INR (USD) in the KWC group for each patient.
Initiating early shifting to Kangaroo ward is cost effective intervention and have huge monetary implication in resource poor countries. (CTRI/2014/05/004625, retrospectively registered, Registered on: 26/05/2014).
Clinical trial registry of India CTRI/2014/05/004625 ( http://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/showallp.php?mid1=7640&EncHid=&userName=CTRI/2014/05/004625 ) Registered on: 26/05/2014. Date of enrolment of the first participant to the trial: 13/11/2013.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 January 2017.
All research outputs
#22,759,452
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#860
of 1,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#327,588
of 370,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#14
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,059 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 370,390 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
