By the same authors

From the same journal

Economic evaluation alongside the Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial (SIFT)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Economic evaluation alongside the Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial (SIFT). / Tahir, Warda; Monahan, Mark; Dorling, Jon; Hewer, Oliver; Bowler, Ursula; Linsell, Louise; Partlett, Christopher; Berrington, Janet Elizabeth; Boyle, Elaine; Embleton, Nicolas; Johnson, Samantha; Leaf, Alison; McCormick, Kenny; McGuire, William; Stenson, Ben J; Juszczak, Ed; Roberts, Tracy E.

In: Archives of disease in childhood-Fetal and neonatal edition, 02.04.2020.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

Tahir, W, Monahan, M, Dorling, J, Hewer, O, Bowler, U, Linsell, L, Partlett, C, Berrington, JE, Boyle, E, Embleton, N, Johnson, S, Leaf, A, McCormick, K, McGuire, W, Stenson, BJ, Juszczak, E & Roberts, TE 2020, 'Economic evaluation alongside the Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial (SIFT)', Archives of disease in childhood-Fetal and neonatal edition. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2019-318346

APA

Tahir, W., Monahan, M., Dorling, J., Hewer, O., Bowler, U., Linsell, L., Partlett, C., Berrington, J. E., Boyle, E., Embleton, N., Johnson, S., Leaf, A., McCormick, K., McGuire, W., Stenson, B. J., Juszczak, E., & Roberts, T. E. (2020). Economic evaluation alongside the Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial (SIFT). Archives of disease in childhood-Fetal and neonatal edition. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2019-318346

Vancouver

Tahir W, Monahan M, Dorling J, Hewer O, Bowler U, Linsell L et al. Economic evaluation alongside the Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial (SIFT). Archives of disease in childhood-Fetal and neonatal edition. 2020 Apr 2. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2019-318346

Author

Tahir, Warda ; Monahan, Mark ; Dorling, Jon ; Hewer, Oliver ; Bowler, Ursula ; Linsell, Louise ; Partlett, Christopher ; Berrington, Janet Elizabeth ; Boyle, Elaine ; Embleton, Nicolas ; Johnson, Samantha ; Leaf, Alison ; McCormick, Kenny ; McGuire, William ; Stenson, Ben J ; Juszczak, Ed ; Roberts, Tracy E. / Economic evaluation alongside the Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial (SIFT). In: Archives of disease in childhood-Fetal and neonatal edition. 2020.

Bibtex - Download

@article{77556fb8f5e14b14a1fe79239f66baf8,
title = "Economic evaluation alongside the Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial (SIFT)",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two rates of enteral feed advancement (18 vs 30 mL/kg/day) in very preterm and very low birth weight infants.DESIGN: Within-trial economic evaluation alongside a multicentre, two-arm parallel group, randomised controlled trial (Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial).SETTING: 55 UK neonatal units from May 2013 to June 2015.PATIENTS: Infants born <32 weeks' gestation or <1500 g, receiving less than 30 mL/kg/day of milk at trial enrolment. Infants with a known severe congenital anomaly, no realistic chance of survival, or unlikely to be traceable for follow-up, were ineligible.INTERVENTIONS: When clinicians were ready to start advancing feed volumes, infants were randomised to receive daily increments in feed volume of 30 mL/kg (intervention) or 18 mL/kg (control).MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Cost per additional survivor without moderate to severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months of age corrected for prematurity.RESULTS: Average costs per infant were slightly higher for faster feeds compared with slower feeds (mean difference £267, 95% CI -6928 to 8117). Fewer infants achieved the principal outcome of survival without moderate to severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months in the faster feeds arm (802/1224 vs 848/1246). The stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis showed a likelihood of worse outcomes for faster feeds compared with slower feeds.CONCLUSIONS: The stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis shows faster feeds are broadly equivalent on cost grounds. However, in terms of outcomes at 24 months age (corrected for prematurity), faster feeds are harmful. Faster feeds should not be recommended on either cost or effectiveness grounds to achieve the primary outcome.",
author = "Warda Tahir and Mark Monahan and Jon Dorling and Oliver Hewer and Ursula Bowler and Louise Linsell and Christopher Partlett and Berrington, {Janet Elizabeth} and Elaine Boyle and Nicolas Embleton and Samantha Johnson and Alison Leaf and Kenny McCormick and William McGuire and Stenson, {Ben J} and Ed Juszczak and Roberts, {Tracy E}",
note = "{\textcopyright} Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.",
year = "2020",
month = apr,
day = "2",
doi = "10.1136/archdischild-2019-318346",
language = "English",
journal = "Archives of disease in childhood-Fetal and neonatal edition",
issn = "1359-2998",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) - Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - Economic evaluation alongside the Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial (SIFT)

AU - Tahir, Warda

AU - Monahan, Mark

AU - Dorling, Jon

AU - Hewer, Oliver

AU - Bowler, Ursula

AU - Linsell, Louise

AU - Partlett, Christopher

AU - Berrington, Janet Elizabeth

AU - Boyle, Elaine

AU - Embleton, Nicolas

AU - Johnson, Samantha

AU - Leaf, Alison

AU - McCormick, Kenny

AU - McGuire, William

AU - Stenson, Ben J

AU - Juszczak, Ed

AU - Roberts, Tracy E

N1 - © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

PY - 2020/4/2

Y1 - 2020/4/2

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two rates of enteral feed advancement (18 vs 30 mL/kg/day) in very preterm and very low birth weight infants.DESIGN: Within-trial economic evaluation alongside a multicentre, two-arm parallel group, randomised controlled trial (Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial).SETTING: 55 UK neonatal units from May 2013 to June 2015.PATIENTS: Infants born <32 weeks' gestation or <1500 g, receiving less than 30 mL/kg/day of milk at trial enrolment. Infants with a known severe congenital anomaly, no realistic chance of survival, or unlikely to be traceable for follow-up, were ineligible.INTERVENTIONS: When clinicians were ready to start advancing feed volumes, infants were randomised to receive daily increments in feed volume of 30 mL/kg (intervention) or 18 mL/kg (control).MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Cost per additional survivor without moderate to severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months of age corrected for prematurity.RESULTS: Average costs per infant were slightly higher for faster feeds compared with slower feeds (mean difference £267, 95% CI -6928 to 8117). Fewer infants achieved the principal outcome of survival without moderate to severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months in the faster feeds arm (802/1224 vs 848/1246). The stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis showed a likelihood of worse outcomes for faster feeds compared with slower feeds.CONCLUSIONS: The stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis shows faster feeds are broadly equivalent on cost grounds. However, in terms of outcomes at 24 months age (corrected for prematurity), faster feeds are harmful. Faster feeds should not be recommended on either cost or effectiveness grounds to achieve the primary outcome.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two rates of enteral feed advancement (18 vs 30 mL/kg/day) in very preterm and very low birth weight infants.DESIGN: Within-trial economic evaluation alongside a multicentre, two-arm parallel group, randomised controlled trial (Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial).SETTING: 55 UK neonatal units from May 2013 to June 2015.PATIENTS: Infants born <32 weeks' gestation or <1500 g, receiving less than 30 mL/kg/day of milk at trial enrolment. Infants with a known severe congenital anomaly, no realistic chance of survival, or unlikely to be traceable for follow-up, were ineligible.INTERVENTIONS: When clinicians were ready to start advancing feed volumes, infants were randomised to receive daily increments in feed volume of 30 mL/kg (intervention) or 18 mL/kg (control).MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Cost per additional survivor without moderate to severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months of age corrected for prematurity.RESULTS: Average costs per infant were slightly higher for faster feeds compared with slower feeds (mean difference £267, 95% CI -6928 to 8117). Fewer infants achieved the principal outcome of survival without moderate to severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months in the faster feeds arm (802/1224 vs 848/1246). The stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis showed a likelihood of worse outcomes for faster feeds compared with slower feeds.CONCLUSIONS: The stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis shows faster feeds are broadly equivalent on cost grounds. However, in terms of outcomes at 24 months age (corrected for prematurity), faster feeds are harmful. Faster feeds should not be recommended on either cost or effectiveness grounds to achieve the primary outcome.

U2 - 10.1136/archdischild-2019-318346

DO - 10.1136/archdischild-2019-318346

M3 - Article

C2 - 32241810

JO - Archives of disease in childhood-Fetal and neonatal edition

JF - Archives of disease in childhood-Fetal and neonatal edition

SN - 1359-2998

ER -