Relative cost-effectiveness of using a liquid human milk fortifier in preterm infants in the US.

Julian F Guest; Fernando Moya; Paula M Sisk; Mark L Hudak; Devon Kuehn

doi:10.2147/CEOR.S122462

Publisher Website

Relative cost-effectiveness of using a liquid human milk fortifier in preterm infants in the US.

Authors

Guest, Julian F¹
Moya, Fernando²
Sisk, Paula M³
Hudak, Mark L⁴
Kuehn, Devon⁵

¹ Catalyst Health Economics Consultants, Northwood, Middlesex, UK; Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College, London, UK.
² Coastal Carolina Neonatology, Wilmington, NC, USA.
³ Novant Health Forsyth Medical Center, Winston Salem, NC, USA.
⁴ Department of Pediatrics, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, FL, USA.
⁵ Department of Pediatrics, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA.

Type

Published Article

Journal

ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR

Publication Date

2017

Volume

9

Pages

49–57

Identifiers

DOI: 10.2147/CEOR.S122462

PMID: 28115859

Source

Medline

Keywords

License

Unknown

Abstract

Using LHMF instead of PHMF in preterm infants enabled resources to be freed-up for alternative use within the system. There is no health economic reason why LHMF should not be used in preference to PHMF in the NICU.

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine. This record was last updated on 07/07/2017 and may not reflect the most current and accurate biomedical/scientific data available from NLM. The corresponding record at NLM can be accessed at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28115859

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times