Cargando…
Cost-effectiveness analysis of ultrasound-guided Seldinger peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC)
BACKGROUND: Ultrasound-guided cannulation of deep mid-arm veins by a modified Seldinger (US-Seldinger) technique has been demonstrated to yield better puncture success rates and lower postoperative complication rates than direct cannulation of superficial veins near the elbow with a short peripheral...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5130933/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27995028 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-3698-8 |
_version_ | 1782470804156448768 |
---|---|
author | Tan, Jianghong Liu, Liping Xie, Jing Hu, Lingli Yang, Qiaolan Wang, Honghong |
author_facet | Tan, Jianghong Liu, Liping Xie, Jing Hu, Lingli Yang, Qiaolan Wang, Honghong |
author_sort | Tan, Jianghong |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Ultrasound-guided cannulation of deep mid-arm veins by a modified Seldinger (US-Seldinger) technique has been demonstrated to yield better puncture success rates and lower postoperative complication rates than direct cannulation of superficial veins near the elbow with a short peripheral cannula and peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) insertion through the cannula (non-US conventional method). Economic factors have been evaluated across different operators (i.e. nurses, radiologists, and general practitioners) and different venous catheter types (i.e. PICCs vs. central venous catheters). However, to our knowledge, data describing the economic evaluation on the aforementioned modified Seldinger technique are lacking. Hence, the aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of US-Seldinger technique (experimental group) compared with that of the non-US conventional method based on direct vein visualization (control group). RESULTS: A cohort of 360 subjects were assigned randomly to the experimental and control groups. Cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) analyses indicated that the effectiveness index (EI) for the experimental group was 89.29% (final CER = 3732.75), whereas that for the control group was 59.18% (final CER = 2492.98). CONCLUSION: The US-Seldinger technique was found to be more cost-effective than the non-US conventional method. These findings support the use of the former in place of the traditional latter technique as a routine puncture technique and suggest that the update would improve intravenous therapy treatment for patients needing PICCs. This study should serve as a reference for national healthcare policy. Trial registration ChiCTR-TRC-14004993 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40064-016-3698-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5130933 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51309332016-12-19 Cost-effectiveness analysis of ultrasound-guided Seldinger peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) Tan, Jianghong Liu, Liping Xie, Jing Hu, Lingli Yang, Qiaolan Wang, Honghong Springerplus Research BACKGROUND: Ultrasound-guided cannulation of deep mid-arm veins by a modified Seldinger (US-Seldinger) technique has been demonstrated to yield better puncture success rates and lower postoperative complication rates than direct cannulation of superficial veins near the elbow with a short peripheral cannula and peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) insertion through the cannula (non-US conventional method). Economic factors have been evaluated across different operators (i.e. nurses, radiologists, and general practitioners) and different venous catheter types (i.e. PICCs vs. central venous catheters). However, to our knowledge, data describing the economic evaluation on the aforementioned modified Seldinger technique are lacking. Hence, the aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of US-Seldinger technique (experimental group) compared with that of the non-US conventional method based on direct vein visualization (control group). RESULTS: A cohort of 360 subjects were assigned randomly to the experimental and control groups. Cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) analyses indicated that the effectiveness index (EI) for the experimental group was 89.29% (final CER = 3732.75), whereas that for the control group was 59.18% (final CER = 2492.98). CONCLUSION: The US-Seldinger technique was found to be more cost-effective than the non-US conventional method. These findings support the use of the former in place of the traditional latter technique as a routine puncture technique and suggest that the update would improve intravenous therapy treatment for patients needing PICCs. This study should serve as a reference for national healthcare policy. Trial registration ChiCTR-TRC-14004993 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40064-016-3698-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2016-12-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5130933/ /pubmed/27995028 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-3698-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Research Tan, Jianghong Liu, Liping Xie, Jing Hu, Lingli Yang, Qiaolan Wang, Honghong Cost-effectiveness analysis of ultrasound-guided Seldinger peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) |
title | Cost-effectiveness analysis of ultrasound-guided Seldinger peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) |
title_full | Cost-effectiveness analysis of ultrasound-guided Seldinger peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) |
title_fullStr | Cost-effectiveness analysis of ultrasound-guided Seldinger peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) |
title_full_unstemmed | Cost-effectiveness analysis of ultrasound-guided Seldinger peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) |
title_short | Cost-effectiveness analysis of ultrasound-guided Seldinger peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) |
title_sort | cost-effectiveness analysis of ultrasound-guided seldinger peripherally inserted central catheters (picc) |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5130933/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27995028 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-3698-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tanjianghong costeffectivenessanalysisofultrasoundguidedseldingerperipherallyinsertedcentralcatheterspicc AT liuliping costeffectivenessanalysisofultrasoundguidedseldingerperipherallyinsertedcentralcatheterspicc AT xiejing costeffectivenessanalysisofultrasoundguidedseldingerperipherallyinsertedcentralcatheterspicc AT hulingli costeffectivenessanalysisofultrasoundguidedseldingerperipherallyinsertedcentralcatheterspicc AT yangqiaolan costeffectivenessanalysisofultrasoundguidedseldingerperipherallyinsertedcentralcatheterspicc AT wanghonghong costeffectivenessanalysisofultrasoundguidedseldingerperipherallyinsertedcentralcatheterspicc |