Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 30, 2025
Introduction of Intracapsular Rotary-cut Procedures IRCP: A Modified Hysteromyomectomy Procedures Facilitating Fertility Preservation
Published on: January 17, 2019
Decision and economic analysis of hostile abortion laws compared with supportive abortion laws
Lea Nehme1, Peggy Ye2, Jim C Huang3
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA (Drs Nehme and Kawakita).
Background:
On June 24, 2022, the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization. Therefore, several states banned abortion, and other states are considering more hostile abortion laws.
Objective:
This study aimed to assess the incidence of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes in the hypothetical cohort where all states have hostile abortion laws compared with the pre-Dobbs v Jackson cohort (supportive abortion laws cohort) and examine the cost-effectiveness of these policies.
Study Design:
This study developed a decision and economic analysis model comparing the hostile abortion laws cohort with the supportive abortion laws cohort in a sample of 5.3 million pregnancies. Cost (inflated to 2022 US dollars) estimates were from a healthcare provider's perspective, including immediate and long-term costs. The time horizon was set to a lifetime. Probabilities, costs, and utilities were derived from the literature. The cost-effectiveness threshold was set to be at $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses using the Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 simulations were performed to assess the robustness of our results. The primary outcomes included maternal mortality and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The secondary outcomes included hysterectomy, cesarean delivery, hospital readmission, neonatal intensive care unit admission, neonatal mortality, profound neurodevelopmental disability, and incremental cost and effectiveness.
Results:
In the base case analysis, the hostile abortion laws cohort had 12,911 more maternal mortalities, 7518 more hysterectomies, 234,376 more cesarean deliveries, 102,712 more hospital readmissions, 83,911 more neonatal intensive care unit admissions, 3311 more neonatal mortalities, and 904 more cases of profound neurodevelopmental disability than the supportive abortion laws cohort. The hostile abortion laws cohort was associated with more cost ($109.8 billion [hostile abortion laws cohort] vs $75.6 billion [supportive abortion laws cohort]) and 120,749,900 fewer quality-adjusted life years with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of negative $140,687.60 than the supportive abortion laws cohort. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggested that the chance of the supportive abortion laws cohort being the preferred strategy was more than 95%.
Conclusion:
When states consider enacting hostile abortion laws, legislators should consider an increase in the incidence of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes.
Related Concept Videos
01:22Standards of Care I
01:17Ethical Dilemmas I
Let us explore some examples to understand the potentially complex moral decisions nurses face.
Take the case of caring for minors, particularly in areas related to reproductive...
01:14Decision Making: Traditional Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
01:14Frustration and Conflict: Avoidance-Avoidance, Double-Approach Avoidance
01:20Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
01:16Null and Alternative Hypotheses
The null hypothesis, denoted by H0 is a statement of no difference between the variables—they are not related. This can often be considered the status quo. As a result if you cannot accept the null, it requires some action.
The alternative hypothesis, denoted by H1 or Ha, is a claim about the...