Advertisement

How to Save Money: Congenital CMV Infection and the Economy

  • E. WalterEmail author
  • C. Brennig
  • V. Schöllbauer
  • Gabriele Halwachs-Baumann
Chapter

Abstract

Human cytomegalovirus (CMV) is the main cause of congenital virus infection in developed countries leading to psychomotor impairment, deafness and blindness. In Germany each year, estimated 6500 children are born with congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, causing estimated 40 deaths and leaving approximately 1200 children (primary infected and from seropositive women) with permanent disabilities such as hearing or vision loss or mental retardation. More children are affected by serious CMV-related disabilities than by several better-known childhood maladies, including Down syndrome [1].

References

  1. 1.
    Cannon MJ, Finn Davis K (2005) Washing our hands of the congenital cytomegalovirus disease epidemic. BMC Public Health 5:70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ludwig A, Hengel H (2009) Epidemiological impact and disease burden of congenital cytomegalovirus infection in Europe. Euro Surveill 14(9):26–32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Porath A, McNutt RA, Smiley LM et al (1990 Jan–Feb) Effectiveness and cost benefit of a proposed live cytomegalovirus vaccine in the prevention of congenital disease. Rev Infect Dis 12(1):31–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gazelle GS, McMahon PM, Siebert U et al (2005 May) Cost-effectiveness analysis in the assessment of diagnostic imaging technologies. Radiology 235(2):361–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Akobundu E, Ju J, Blatt L et al (2006) Cost-of-illness studies – A review of current methods. Pharmacoeconomics 24(9):869–890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Azam AZ, Vial Y, Fawer CL, Zufferey J, Hohlfeld P (2001) Prenatal diagnosis of congenital cytomegalovirus infection. Obstet Gynecol 97(3):443–448PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Halwachs-Baumann G, Genser B (2003) Die konnatale Zytomegalievirusinfektion Epidemiologie – Diagnose – Therapie. Springer, WienCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Halwachs-Baumann G., Ludwig A., Hengel H., Cytomegalie-virus (CMV) – Infektionen in der Schwangerschaft. www.dgk.de, o.J.
  9. 9.
    Ornoy A, Diav-Citrin O (2006) Fetal effects of primary and secondary cytomegalovirus infection in pregnancy. Reprod Toxicol 21:399–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dollard S, Grosse S, Ross D (2007) New estimates of the prevalence of neurological and sensory sequelae and mortality associated with congenital cytomegalovirus infection. Rev Med Virol 17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ramsay M, Miller E, Peckham C (1991) Outcome of confirmed symptomatic congenital cytomegalovirus infection. Arch Dis Child 66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schöffski O, von der Schulenburg Graf JM (2008) Gesundheitsökonomische Evaluation. Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift 159(5–6):160–168Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    von der Schulenburg Graf JM, Greiner W, Jost F et al (2007) Deutsche Empfehlungen zur gesundheitsökonomischen Evaluation – dritte und aktualisierte Fassung des Hannoveraner Konsens. Gesundh ökon Qual Manag 12.  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-963505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
    Institut für Gesundheitsökonomik München (2008) Bundeseinheitlicher Basisfallwert für Krankenhausleistungen und seine Konsequenzen: ein falscher Weg aus ordnungspolitischer Sicht.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    AOK (2008) Gesundheitskasse für Niedersachsen-Leistungen Hörgeräte. www.aok.de
  18. 18.
    Sohlbach I., Burgdörfer J., Lang J. (2008) Blindheit und Sehbehinderung. www.polizei-projekte.nrw.de
  19. 19.
    Leitlinien der Gesellschaft für Neonatologie u Pädiatrische Intensivmedizin Zerebrale Anfälle beim Neugeborenen, 2004Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Leitlinien der Gesellschaft für Neuropädiatrie, Wahrnehmungsstörungen, 2001Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lange K, Danne T, Kordonouri O et al (2004) Diabetesmanifestation im Kindesalter: Alltagsbelastungen und berufliche Entwicklung der Eltern. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 129Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lafuma A, Brezin A, Lopatriello S et al (2006) Evaluation of non-medical costs associated with visual impairment in four European countries. Pharmacoeconomics 24(2)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Preuss-Lausitz U (2004) Zur Frage der Kosten gemeinsamer schulischer Bildung. www.ewi.tu belin.de/files/resourcesmodule/@random435c8d75c8731/1131958614_Kosten11_05.pptGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    AOK (2009) allg. Pflegesatz, Vollstationäre Pflege, www.aok-pflegenavigator.de
  25. 25.
    Munro SC, Hall B, Whybin LR et al (2005) Diagnosis of and screening for cytomegalovirus infection in pregnant women. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 43(9):4713–4718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lazzarotto T, Guerra B, Lanari M et al (2008) New advances in the diagnosis of congenital cytomegalovirus infection. J Clin Virol 41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Curdt I, Herzogenrath J, Bernhardt S, Braun HB, Eichler R, Maine GT, Hausmann M, Stricker RT, Stricker RN, Lazzarotto T, Christ H (2006) Preliminary evaluation of the Abbott ARCHITECT anti cytomegalovirus IgG, IgM and IgG avidity assays linked by an automated reflex algorithm. American Association for Clinical Chemistry Annual Meeting, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nigro G, Adler SP, La Torre R, Best M (2005) Passive immunization during pregnancy for congenital cytomegalovirus infection. N Engl J Med 353:1350–1362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Drummond MF (1986) Studies in economic appraisal in health care, vol 2. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Drummond MF (1992) Cost of illness studies: a major headache? Pharmacoeconomics 2:1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Brown GC, Brown MM, Sharma S, Brown HC (1998) Patient perceptions of quality-of-life associated with bilateral visual loss. Int Ophthalmol 22(5):307–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Weintraub WS (2003) Cardiovascular health care economics. Humana Press, Totowa, NJCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Insinga RP, Laessig RH, Hoffman GL (2002) Newborn screening with tandem mass spectrometry: examining its cost-effectiveness in the Wisconsin Newborn Screening Panel. J Pediatr. 141:524–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Walter
    • 1
    Email author
  • C. Brennig
    • 1
  • V. Schöllbauer
    • 1
  • Gabriele Halwachs-Baumann
    • 2
  1. 1.IPF Institute for Pharmaeconomic ResearchViennaAustria
  2. 2.Department of Laboratory Medicine, Regional Hospital SteyrSteyrAustria

Personalised recommendations