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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |