Cargando…

Selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination in intensive care unit patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVE: To determine costs and effects of selective digestive tract decontamination (SDD) and selective oropharyngeal decontamination (SOD) as compared with standard care (ie, no SDD/SOD (SC)) from a healthcare perspective in Dutch Intensive Care Units (ICUs). DESIGN: A post hoc analysis of a pre...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Oostdijk, Evelien A N, de Wit, G A, Bakker, Marina, de Smet, Anne Marie G A, Bonten, M J M
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3612803/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23468472
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002529
_version_ 1782264689406771200
author Oostdijk, Evelien A N
de Wit, G A
Bakker, Marina
de Smet, Anne Marie G A
Bonten, M J M
author_facet Oostdijk, Evelien A N
de Wit, G A
Bakker, Marina
de Smet, Anne Marie G A
Bonten, M J M
author_sort Oostdijk, Evelien A N
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To determine costs and effects of selective digestive tract decontamination (SDD) and selective oropharyngeal decontamination (SOD) as compared with standard care (ie, no SDD/SOD (SC)) from a healthcare perspective in Dutch Intensive Care Units (ICUs). DESIGN: A post hoc analysis of a previously performed cluster-randomised trial (NEJM 2009;360:20). SETTING: 13 Dutch ICUs. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with ICU-stay of >48 h that received SDD (n=2045), SOD (n=1904) or SC (n=1990). INTERVENTIONS: SDD or SOD. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Effects were based on hospital survival, expressed as crude Life Years Gained (cLYG). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated, with corresponding cost acceptability curves. Sensitivity analyses were performed for discount rates, costs of SDD, SOD and mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: Total costs per patient were €41 941 for SC (95% CI €40 184 to €43 698), €40 433 for SOD (95% CI €38 838 to €42 029) and €41 183 for SOD (95% CI €39 408 to €42 958). SOD and SDD resulted in crude LYG of +0.04 and +0.25, respectively, as compared with SC, implying that both SDD and SOD are dominant (ie, cheaper and more beneficial) over SC. In cost-effectiveness acceptability curves probabilities for cost-effectiveness, compared with standard care, ranged from 89% to 93% for SOD and from 63% to 72% for SDD, for acceptable costs for 1 LYG ranging from €0 to €20 000. Sensitivity analysis for mechanical ventilation and discount rates did not change interpretation. Yet, if costs of the topical component of SDD and SOD would increase 40-fold to €400/day and €40/day (maximum values based on free market prices in 2012), the estimated ICER as compared with SC for SDD would be €21 590 per LYG. SOD would remain cost-saving. CONCLUSIONS: SDD and SOD were both effective and cost-saving in Dutch ICUs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3612803
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36128032013-07-08 Selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination in intensive care unit patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis Oostdijk, Evelien A N de Wit, G A Bakker, Marina de Smet, Anne Marie G A Bonten, M J M BMJ Open Health Economics OBJECTIVE: To determine costs and effects of selective digestive tract decontamination (SDD) and selective oropharyngeal decontamination (SOD) as compared with standard care (ie, no SDD/SOD (SC)) from a healthcare perspective in Dutch Intensive Care Units (ICUs). DESIGN: A post hoc analysis of a previously performed cluster-randomised trial (NEJM 2009;360:20). SETTING: 13 Dutch ICUs. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with ICU-stay of >48 h that received SDD (n=2045), SOD (n=1904) or SC (n=1990). INTERVENTIONS: SDD or SOD. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Effects were based on hospital survival, expressed as crude Life Years Gained (cLYG). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated, with corresponding cost acceptability curves. Sensitivity analyses were performed for discount rates, costs of SDD, SOD and mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: Total costs per patient were €41 941 for SC (95% CI €40 184 to €43 698), €40 433 for SOD (95% CI €38 838 to €42 029) and €41 183 for SOD (95% CI €39 408 to €42 958). SOD and SDD resulted in crude LYG of +0.04 and +0.25, respectively, as compared with SC, implying that both SDD and SOD are dominant (ie, cheaper and more beneficial) over SC. In cost-effectiveness acceptability curves probabilities for cost-effectiveness, compared with standard care, ranged from 89% to 93% for SOD and from 63% to 72% for SDD, for acceptable costs for 1 LYG ranging from €0 to €20 000. Sensitivity analysis for mechanical ventilation and discount rates did not change interpretation. Yet, if costs of the topical component of SDD and SOD would increase 40-fold to €400/day and €40/day (maximum values based on free market prices in 2012), the estimated ICER as compared with SC for SDD would be €21 590 per LYG. SOD would remain cost-saving. CONCLUSIONS: SDD and SOD were both effective and cost-saving in Dutch ICUs. BMJ Publishing Group 2013-03-05 /pmc/articles/PMC3612803/ /pubmed/23468472 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002529 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcode
spellingShingle Health Economics
Oostdijk, Evelien A N
de Wit, G A
Bakker, Marina
de Smet, Anne Marie G A
Bonten, M J M
Selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination in intensive care unit patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title Selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination in intensive care unit patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_full Selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination in intensive care unit patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_fullStr Selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination in intensive care unit patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_full_unstemmed Selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination in intensive care unit patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_short Selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination in intensive care unit patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_sort selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination in intensive care unit patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
topic Health Economics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3612803/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23468472
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002529
work_keys_str_mv AT oostdijkevelienan selectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationinintensivecareunitpatientsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT dewitga selectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationinintensivecareunitpatientsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT bakkermarina selectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationinintensivecareunitpatientsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT desmetannemariega selectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationinintensivecareunitpatientsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT bontenmjm selectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationinintensivecareunitpatientsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT selectivedecontaminationofthedigestivetractandselectiveoropharyngealdecontaminationinintensivecareunitpatientsacosteffectivenessanalysis