Cargando…
A cost-effectiveness analysis of two different antimicrobial stewardship programs
There is a lack of formal economic analysis to assess the efficiency of antimicrobial stewardship programs. Herein, we conducted a cost-effectiveness study to assess two different strategies of Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs. A 30-day Markov model was developed to analyze how cost-effective was...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9425487/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27094234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjid.2016.02.005 |
_version_ | 1784778460270428160 |
---|---|
author | Okumura, Lucas Miyake Riveros, Bruno Salgado Gomes-da-Silva, Monica Maria Veroneze, Izelandia |
author_facet | Okumura, Lucas Miyake Riveros, Bruno Salgado Gomes-da-Silva, Monica Maria Veroneze, Izelandia |
author_sort | Okumura, Lucas Miyake |
collection | PubMed |
description | There is a lack of formal economic analysis to assess the efficiency of antimicrobial stewardship programs. Herein, we conducted a cost-effectiveness study to assess two different strategies of Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs. A 30-day Markov model was developed to analyze how cost-effective was a Bundled Antimicrobial Stewardship implemented in a university hospital in Brazil. Clinical data derived from a historical cohort that compared two different strategies of antimicrobial stewardship programs and had 30-day mortality as main outcome. Selected costs included: workload, cost of defined daily doses, length of stay, laboratory and imaging resources used to diagnose infections. Data were analyzed by deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis to assess model's robustness, tornado diagram and Cost-Effectiveness Acceptability Curve. Bundled Strategy was more expensive (Cost difference US$ 2119.70), however, it was more efficient (US$ 27,549.15 vs 29,011.46). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that critical variables did not alter final Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio. Bundled Strategy had higher probabilities of being cost-effective, which was endorsed by cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. As health systems claim for efficient technologies, this study conclude that Bundled Antimicrobial Stewardship Program was more cost-effective, which means that stewardship strategies with such characteristics would be of special interest in a societal and clinical perspective. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9425487 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94254872022-08-31 A cost-effectiveness analysis of two different antimicrobial stewardship programs Okumura, Lucas Miyake Riveros, Bruno Salgado Gomes-da-Silva, Monica Maria Veroneze, Izelandia Braz J Infect Dis Original Article There is a lack of formal economic analysis to assess the efficiency of antimicrobial stewardship programs. Herein, we conducted a cost-effectiveness study to assess two different strategies of Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs. A 30-day Markov model was developed to analyze how cost-effective was a Bundled Antimicrobial Stewardship implemented in a university hospital in Brazil. Clinical data derived from a historical cohort that compared two different strategies of antimicrobial stewardship programs and had 30-day mortality as main outcome. Selected costs included: workload, cost of defined daily doses, length of stay, laboratory and imaging resources used to diagnose infections. Data were analyzed by deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis to assess model's robustness, tornado diagram and Cost-Effectiveness Acceptability Curve. Bundled Strategy was more expensive (Cost difference US$ 2119.70), however, it was more efficient (US$ 27,549.15 vs 29,011.46). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that critical variables did not alter final Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio. Bundled Strategy had higher probabilities of being cost-effective, which was endorsed by cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. As health systems claim for efficient technologies, this study conclude that Bundled Antimicrobial Stewardship Program was more cost-effective, which means that stewardship strategies with such characteristics would be of special interest in a societal and clinical perspective. Elsevier 2016-04-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9425487/ /pubmed/27094234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjid.2016.02.005 Text en © 2016 Elsevier Editora Ltda. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Okumura, Lucas Miyake Riveros, Bruno Salgado Gomes-da-Silva, Monica Maria Veroneze, Izelandia A cost-effectiveness analysis of two different antimicrobial stewardship programs |
title | A cost-effectiveness analysis of two different antimicrobial stewardship programs |
title_full | A cost-effectiveness analysis of two different antimicrobial stewardship programs |
title_fullStr | A cost-effectiveness analysis of two different antimicrobial stewardship programs |
title_full_unstemmed | A cost-effectiveness analysis of two different antimicrobial stewardship programs |
title_short | A cost-effectiveness analysis of two different antimicrobial stewardship programs |
title_sort | cost-effectiveness analysis of two different antimicrobial stewardship programs |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9425487/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27094234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjid.2016.02.005 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT okumuralucasmiyake acosteffectivenessanalysisoftwodifferentantimicrobialstewardshipprograms AT riverosbrunosalgado acosteffectivenessanalysisoftwodifferentantimicrobialstewardshipprograms AT gomesdasilvamonicamaria acosteffectivenessanalysisoftwodifferentantimicrobialstewardshipprograms AT veronezeizelandia acosteffectivenessanalysisoftwodifferentantimicrobialstewardshipprograms AT okumuralucasmiyake costeffectivenessanalysisoftwodifferentantimicrobialstewardshipprograms AT riverosbrunosalgado costeffectivenessanalysisoftwodifferentantimicrobialstewardshipprograms AT gomesdasilvamonicamaria costeffectivenessanalysisoftwodifferentantimicrobialstewardshipprograms AT veronezeizelandia costeffectivenessanalysisoftwodifferentantimicrobialstewardshipprograms |