Cargando…
A Cost-Effectiveness Study Comparing Ready-to-Administer and Traditional Vial-and-Syringe Method for Opioids
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop a cost-effectiveness model for manufacturer-prepared prefilled ready-to-administer (RTA) syringe products versus the traditional vial-and-syringe administration of intravenous (IV) opioids. METHODS: Cost parameters included cost of manufacturer-pre...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Healthcare
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9314479/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35687249 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40122-022-00402-z |
_version_ | 1784754329099436032 |
---|---|
author | Arora, Prachi Muehrcke, Maria Hertig, John |
author_facet | Arora, Prachi Muehrcke, Maria Hertig, John |
author_sort | Arora, Prachi |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop a cost-effectiveness model for manufacturer-prepared prefilled ready-to-administer (RTA) syringe products versus the traditional vial-and-syringe administration of intravenous (IV) opioids. METHODS: Cost parameters included cost of manufacturer-prepared prefilled RTA syringe product, traditional vial and syringe, drug preparation, drug administration, drug waste, and severity of error. Effectiveness endpoint included number of preparation and administration errors in each comparator arm. Simple decision tree was used, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as the reduction in the incremental errors per observation with RTA compared with traditional vial-and-syringe method. One-way sensitivity analysis (OWSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were conducted to test the robustness of the model. TreeAge Pro software was used to create and analyze the decision model. All the cost parameters were converted to USD 2021. RESULTS: Base-case analysis showed that the cost of the RTA arm was lower by $182.61 and the number of errors in the RTA arm was lower by 94%, compared with the traditional vial-and-syringe arm. The manufacturer-prepared prefilled RTA syringe product was found to be cost-effective with an incremental savings of $22,554 per additional error avoided. Sensitivity analysis showed that ICER value was most sensitive to the probability of errors; however, the results were robust in showing that RTA is the preferred cost-effective option, when both the costs and effectiveness parameters were varied substantially. CONCLUSION: This economic evaluation analyzed costs of using manufacturer-prepared prefilled RTA syringe product IV opioids and incremental benefits in terms of reduced errors, adverse events, and their associated costs. Manufacturer-prepared prefilled RTA syringe product was found to be cost-effective, demonstrating cost savings by reduction in the error rates. Integrating and adopting RTA syringe products within a health system could play an important role in improving care, building efficiency, increasing patient safety, and saving money. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40122-022-00402-z. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9314479 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Healthcare |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93144792022-07-27 A Cost-Effectiveness Study Comparing Ready-to-Administer and Traditional Vial-and-Syringe Method for Opioids Arora, Prachi Muehrcke, Maria Hertig, John Pain Ther Original Research OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop a cost-effectiveness model for manufacturer-prepared prefilled ready-to-administer (RTA) syringe products versus the traditional vial-and-syringe administration of intravenous (IV) opioids. METHODS: Cost parameters included cost of manufacturer-prepared prefilled RTA syringe product, traditional vial and syringe, drug preparation, drug administration, drug waste, and severity of error. Effectiveness endpoint included number of preparation and administration errors in each comparator arm. Simple decision tree was used, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as the reduction in the incremental errors per observation with RTA compared with traditional vial-and-syringe method. One-way sensitivity analysis (OWSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were conducted to test the robustness of the model. TreeAge Pro software was used to create and analyze the decision model. All the cost parameters were converted to USD 2021. RESULTS: Base-case analysis showed that the cost of the RTA arm was lower by $182.61 and the number of errors in the RTA arm was lower by 94%, compared with the traditional vial-and-syringe arm. The manufacturer-prepared prefilled RTA syringe product was found to be cost-effective with an incremental savings of $22,554 per additional error avoided. Sensitivity analysis showed that ICER value was most sensitive to the probability of errors; however, the results were robust in showing that RTA is the preferred cost-effective option, when both the costs and effectiveness parameters were varied substantially. CONCLUSION: This economic evaluation analyzed costs of using manufacturer-prepared prefilled RTA syringe product IV opioids and incremental benefits in terms of reduced errors, adverse events, and their associated costs. Manufacturer-prepared prefilled RTA syringe product was found to be cost-effective, demonstrating cost savings by reduction in the error rates. Integrating and adopting RTA syringe products within a health system could play an important role in improving care, building efficiency, increasing patient safety, and saving money. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40122-022-00402-z. Springer Healthcare 2022-06-10 2022-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9314479/ /pubmed/35687249 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40122-022-00402-z Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Research Arora, Prachi Muehrcke, Maria Hertig, John A Cost-Effectiveness Study Comparing Ready-to-Administer and Traditional Vial-and-Syringe Method for Opioids |
title | A Cost-Effectiveness Study Comparing Ready-to-Administer and Traditional Vial-and-Syringe Method for Opioids |
title_full | A Cost-Effectiveness Study Comparing Ready-to-Administer and Traditional Vial-and-Syringe Method for Opioids |
title_fullStr | A Cost-Effectiveness Study Comparing Ready-to-Administer and Traditional Vial-and-Syringe Method for Opioids |
title_full_unstemmed | A Cost-Effectiveness Study Comparing Ready-to-Administer and Traditional Vial-and-Syringe Method for Opioids |
title_short | A Cost-Effectiveness Study Comparing Ready-to-Administer and Traditional Vial-and-Syringe Method for Opioids |
title_sort | cost-effectiveness study comparing ready-to-administer and traditional vial-and-syringe method for opioids |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9314479/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35687249 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40122-022-00402-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT aroraprachi acosteffectivenessstudycomparingreadytoadministerandtraditionalvialandsyringemethodforopioids AT muehrckemaria acosteffectivenessstudycomparingreadytoadministerandtraditionalvialandsyringemethodforopioids AT hertigjohn acosteffectivenessstudycomparingreadytoadministerandtraditionalvialandsyringemethodforopioids AT aroraprachi costeffectivenessstudycomparingreadytoadministerandtraditionalvialandsyringemethodforopioids AT muehrckemaria costeffectivenessstudycomparingreadytoadministerandtraditionalvialandsyringemethodforopioids AT hertigjohn costeffectivenessstudycomparingreadytoadministerandtraditionalvialandsyringemethodforopioids |