Cargando…

Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) screening and isolation in the general medicine ward: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND: Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) are a serious antimicrobial resistant threat in the healthcare setting. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of VRE screening and isolation for patients at high-risk for colonisation on a general medicine ward compared to no VRE screening and isolatio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mac, Stephen, Fitzpatrick, Tiffany, Johnstone, Jennie, Sander, Beate
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6820905/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31687132
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13756-019-0628-x
_version_ 1783464041027469312
author Mac, Stephen
Fitzpatrick, Tiffany
Johnstone, Jennie
Sander, Beate
author_facet Mac, Stephen
Fitzpatrick, Tiffany
Johnstone, Jennie
Sander, Beate
author_sort Mac, Stephen
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) are a serious antimicrobial resistant threat in the healthcare setting. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of VRE screening and isolation for patients at high-risk for colonisation on a general medicine ward compared to no VRE screening and isolation from the healthcare payer perspective. METHODS: We developed a microsimulation model using local data and VRE literature, to simulate a 20-bed general medicine ward at a tertiary-care hospital with up to 1000 admissions, approximating 1 year. Primary outcomes were accrued over the patient’s lifetime, discounted at 1.5%, and included expected health outcomes (VRE colonisations, VRE infections, VRE-related bacteremia, and deaths subsequent to VRE infection), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), healthcare costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and scenario analyses were conducted to assess parameter uncertainty. RESULTS: In our base-case analysis, VRE screening and isolation prevented six healthcare-associated VRE colonisations per 1000 admissions (6/1000), 0.6/1000 VRE-related infections, 0.2/1000 VRE-related bacteremia, and 0.1/1000 deaths subsequent to VRE infection. VRE screening and isolation accrued 0.0142 incremental QALYs at an incremental cost of $112, affording an ICER of $7850 per QALY. VRE screening and isolation practice was more likely to be cost-effective (> 50%) at a cost-effectiveness threshold of $50,000/QALY. Stochasticity (randomness) had a significant impact on the cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSION: VRE screening and isolation can be cost-effective in majority of model simulations at commonly used cost-effectiveness thresholds, and is likely economically attractive in general medicine settings. Our findings strengthen the understanding of VRE prevention strategies and are of importance to hospital program planners and infection prevention and control.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6820905
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68209052019-11-04 Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) screening and isolation in the general medicine ward: a cost-effectiveness analysis Mac, Stephen Fitzpatrick, Tiffany Johnstone, Jennie Sander, Beate Antimicrob Resist Infect Control Research BACKGROUND: Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) are a serious antimicrobial resistant threat in the healthcare setting. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of VRE screening and isolation for patients at high-risk for colonisation on a general medicine ward compared to no VRE screening and isolation from the healthcare payer perspective. METHODS: We developed a microsimulation model using local data and VRE literature, to simulate a 20-bed general medicine ward at a tertiary-care hospital with up to 1000 admissions, approximating 1 year. Primary outcomes were accrued over the patient’s lifetime, discounted at 1.5%, and included expected health outcomes (VRE colonisations, VRE infections, VRE-related bacteremia, and deaths subsequent to VRE infection), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), healthcare costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and scenario analyses were conducted to assess parameter uncertainty. RESULTS: In our base-case analysis, VRE screening and isolation prevented six healthcare-associated VRE colonisations per 1000 admissions (6/1000), 0.6/1000 VRE-related infections, 0.2/1000 VRE-related bacteremia, and 0.1/1000 deaths subsequent to VRE infection. VRE screening and isolation accrued 0.0142 incremental QALYs at an incremental cost of $112, affording an ICER of $7850 per QALY. VRE screening and isolation practice was more likely to be cost-effective (> 50%) at a cost-effectiveness threshold of $50,000/QALY. Stochasticity (randomness) had a significant impact on the cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSION: VRE screening and isolation can be cost-effective in majority of model simulations at commonly used cost-effectiveness thresholds, and is likely economically attractive in general medicine settings. Our findings strengthen the understanding of VRE prevention strategies and are of importance to hospital program planners and infection prevention and control. BioMed Central 2019-10-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6820905/ /pubmed/31687132 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13756-019-0628-x Text en © The Author(s). 2019 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. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Mac, Stephen
Fitzpatrick, Tiffany
Johnstone, Jennie
Sander, Beate
Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) screening and isolation in the general medicine ward: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) screening and isolation in the general medicine ward: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_full Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) screening and isolation in the general medicine ward: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_fullStr Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) screening and isolation in the general medicine ward: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_full_unstemmed Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) screening and isolation in the general medicine ward: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_short Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) screening and isolation in the general medicine ward: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_sort vancomycin-resistant enterococci (vre) screening and isolation in the general medicine ward: a cost-effectiveness analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6820905/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31687132
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13756-019-0628-x
work_keys_str_mv AT macstephen vancomycinresistantenterococcivrescreeningandisolationinthegeneralmedicinewardacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT fitzpatricktiffany vancomycinresistantenterococcivrescreeningandisolationinthegeneralmedicinewardacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT johnstonejennie vancomycinresistantenterococcivrescreeningandisolationinthegeneralmedicinewardacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT sanderbeate vancomycinresistantenterococcivrescreeningandisolationinthegeneralmedicinewardacosteffectivenessanalysis