Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness analysis of bundled innovative devices versus standard approach in the prevention of unscheduled peripheral venous catheters removal due to complications in France

The objective of the study was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of bundled devices (BDs) versus standard devices (SDs) for the prevention of unscheduled peripheral venous catheter (PVC) removal due to complication from a French investigator-initiated, open-label, single center, randomized-co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Maunoury, Franck, Drugeon, Bertrand, Boisson, Matthieu, Marjanovic, Nicolas, Couvreur, Raphael, Mimoz, Olivier, Guenezan, Jeremy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9197036/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35700207
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269750
_version_ 1784727314725076992
author Maunoury, Franck
Drugeon, Bertrand
Boisson, Matthieu
Marjanovic, Nicolas
Couvreur, Raphael
Mimoz, Olivier
Guenezan, Jeremy
author_facet Maunoury, Franck
Drugeon, Bertrand
Boisson, Matthieu
Marjanovic, Nicolas
Couvreur, Raphael
Mimoz, Olivier
Guenezan, Jeremy
author_sort Maunoury, Franck
collection PubMed
description The objective of the study was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of bundled devices (BDs) versus standard devices (SDs) for the prevention of unscheduled peripheral venous catheter (PVC) removal due to complication from a French investigator-initiated, open-label, single center, randomized-controlled, two-by-two factorial trial (CLEAN-3 study). A 14-day time non homogeneous semi-markovian model was performed to be fitted to longitudinal individual patient data from CLEAN-3 database. This model includes five health states and eight transitional events; a base case scenario, two scenario analyses and bootstrap sensitivity analyses were performed. The cost-effectiveness criterion was the cost per patient with unscheduled PVC removal avoided. 989 adult (age≥18 years) patients were analyzed to compare the BDs group (494 patients), and the SDs group (495 patients). The assessed intervention was a combination of closed integrated catheters, positive displacement needleless-connectors, disinfecting caps, and single-use prefilled flush syringes compared with the use of open catheters and three-way stopcocks for treatment administration. For the base case scenario, an unscheduled 1(st) PVC removal before discharge was significantly more frequent in the SDs group (235 patients (47.5%) in the SDs group and 172 patients (34.8%) in the BDs group, p = 0.00006). After adjustment for 1(st) catheter time, the number of patients with unscheduled PVC removal per day was of 16 (95%CI: 15; 18) patients (out of 100) in the BDs group and of 26 (95%CI: 24; 28) patients (out of 100) in the SDs group. The mean cost per patient (adjusted on catheter-time) was of €144 (95%CI: €135-€154) for patients in the SDs group versus €102 (95%CI: €95-€109) for patients in the BDs group; the mean saving per patient was of €42 (95%CI: €32-€54). As a consequence, the assessed BDs strategy was less costly and more effective than the SDs strategy. Trail registration: CLEAN-3 study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03757143.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9197036
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91970362022-06-15 Cost-effectiveness analysis of bundled innovative devices versus standard approach in the prevention of unscheduled peripheral venous catheters removal due to complications in France Maunoury, Franck Drugeon, Bertrand Boisson, Matthieu Marjanovic, Nicolas Couvreur, Raphael Mimoz, Olivier Guenezan, Jeremy PLoS One Research Article The objective of the study was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of bundled devices (BDs) versus standard devices (SDs) for the prevention of unscheduled peripheral venous catheter (PVC) removal due to complication from a French investigator-initiated, open-label, single center, randomized-controlled, two-by-two factorial trial (CLEAN-3 study). A 14-day time non homogeneous semi-markovian model was performed to be fitted to longitudinal individual patient data from CLEAN-3 database. This model includes five health states and eight transitional events; a base case scenario, two scenario analyses and bootstrap sensitivity analyses were performed. The cost-effectiveness criterion was the cost per patient with unscheduled PVC removal avoided. 989 adult (age≥18 years) patients were analyzed to compare the BDs group (494 patients), and the SDs group (495 patients). The assessed intervention was a combination of closed integrated catheters, positive displacement needleless-connectors, disinfecting caps, and single-use prefilled flush syringes compared with the use of open catheters and three-way stopcocks for treatment administration. For the base case scenario, an unscheduled 1(st) PVC removal before discharge was significantly more frequent in the SDs group (235 patients (47.5%) in the SDs group and 172 patients (34.8%) in the BDs group, p = 0.00006). After adjustment for 1(st) catheter time, the number of patients with unscheduled PVC removal per day was of 16 (95%CI: 15; 18) patients (out of 100) in the BDs group and of 26 (95%CI: 24; 28) patients (out of 100) in the SDs group. The mean cost per patient (adjusted on catheter-time) was of €144 (95%CI: €135-€154) for patients in the SDs group versus €102 (95%CI: €95-€109) for patients in the BDs group; the mean saving per patient was of €42 (95%CI: €32-€54). As a consequence, the assessed BDs strategy was less costly and more effective than the SDs strategy. Trail registration: CLEAN-3 study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03757143. Public Library of Science 2022-06-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9197036/ /pubmed/35700207 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269750 Text en © 2022 Maunoury et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Maunoury, Franck
Drugeon, Bertrand
Boisson, Matthieu
Marjanovic, Nicolas
Couvreur, Raphael
Mimoz, Olivier
Guenezan, Jeremy
Cost-effectiveness analysis of bundled innovative devices versus standard approach in the prevention of unscheduled peripheral venous catheters removal due to complications in France
title Cost-effectiveness analysis of bundled innovative devices versus standard approach in the prevention of unscheduled peripheral venous catheters removal due to complications in France
title_full Cost-effectiveness analysis of bundled innovative devices versus standard approach in the prevention of unscheduled peripheral venous catheters removal due to complications in France
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness analysis of bundled innovative devices versus standard approach in the prevention of unscheduled peripheral venous catheters removal due to complications in France
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness analysis of bundled innovative devices versus standard approach in the prevention of unscheduled peripheral venous catheters removal due to complications in France
title_short Cost-effectiveness analysis of bundled innovative devices versus standard approach in the prevention of unscheduled peripheral venous catheters removal due to complications in France
title_sort cost-effectiveness analysis of bundled innovative devices versus standard approach in the prevention of unscheduled peripheral venous catheters removal due to complications in france
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9197036/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35700207
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269750
work_keys_str_mv AT maunouryfranck costeffectivenessanalysisofbundledinnovativedevicesversusstandardapproachinthepreventionofunscheduledperipheralvenouscathetersremovalduetocomplicationsinfrance
AT drugeonbertrand costeffectivenessanalysisofbundledinnovativedevicesversusstandardapproachinthepreventionofunscheduledperipheralvenouscathetersremovalduetocomplicationsinfrance
AT boissonmatthieu costeffectivenessanalysisofbundledinnovativedevicesversusstandardapproachinthepreventionofunscheduledperipheralvenouscathetersremovalduetocomplicationsinfrance
AT marjanovicnicolas costeffectivenessanalysisofbundledinnovativedevicesversusstandardapproachinthepreventionofunscheduledperipheralvenouscathetersremovalduetocomplicationsinfrance
AT couvreurraphael costeffectivenessanalysisofbundledinnovativedevicesversusstandardapproachinthepreventionofunscheduledperipheralvenouscathetersremovalduetocomplicationsinfrance
AT mimozolivier costeffectivenessanalysisofbundledinnovativedevicesversusstandardapproachinthepreventionofunscheduledperipheralvenouscathetersremovalduetocomplicationsinfrance
AT guenezanjeremy costeffectivenessanalysisofbundledinnovativedevicesversusstandardapproachinthepreventionofunscheduledperipheralvenouscathetersremovalduetocomplicationsinfrance
AT costeffectivenessanalysisofbundledinnovativedevicesversusstandardapproachinthepreventionofunscheduledperipheralvenouscathetersremovalduetocomplicationsinfrance