JPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition · 2023
Cost-effectiveness of taurolidine-citrate in a cohort of patients with intestinal failure receiving home parenteral nutrition.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Williams Thomas J, Moy Naomi, Kaazan Patricia, Callaghan Gavin, Holtmann Gerald, Martin Neal
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) in patients receiving home parenteral nutrition (HPN) for chronic intestinal failure (CIF) are associated with significant morbidity and financial costs. Taurolidine is associated with a reduction in bloodstream infections, with limited information on the cost-effectiveness as the primary prevention. This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of using taurolidine-citrate for the primary prevention of CRBSIs within a quaternary hospital.
METHODS: All patients with CIF receiving HPN were identified between January 2015 and November 2022. Data were retrospectively collected regarding patient demographics, HPN use, CRBSI diagnosis, and use of taurolidine-citrate. The direct costs associated with CRBSI-associated admissions and taurolidine-citrate use were obtained from the coding department using a bottom-up approach. An incremental cost-effective analysis was performed, with a time horizon of 4 years, to compare the costs associated with primary and secondary prevention against the outcome of cost per infection avoided.
RESULTS: Forty-four patients received HPN within this period. The CRBSI rates were 3.25 infections per 1000 catheter days before the use of taurolidine-citrate and 0.35 infections per 1000 catheter days after taurolidine-citrate use. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio indicates primary prevention is the weakly dominant intervention, with the base case value of $27.04 per CRBSI avoided. This held with one-way sensitivity analysis.
CONCLUSION: Taurolidine-citrate in the primary prevention of CRBSIs in patients with CIF receiving HPN is associated with reduced hospital costs and infection rates.
METHODS: All patients with CIF receiving HPN were identified between January 2015 and November 2022. Data were retrospectively collected regarding patient demographics, HPN use, CRBSI diagnosis, and use of taurolidine-citrate. The direct costs associated with CRBSI-associated admissions and taurolidine-citrate use were obtained from the coding department using a bottom-up approach. An incremental cost-effective analysis was performed, with a time horizon of 4 years, to compare the costs associated with primary and secondary prevention against the outcome of cost per infection avoided.
RESULTS: Forty-four patients received HPN within this period. The CRBSI rates were 3.25 infections per 1000 catheter days before the use of taurolidine-citrate and 0.35 infections per 1000 catheter days after taurolidine-citrate use. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio indicates primary prevention is the weakly dominant intervention, with the base case value of $27.04 per CRBSI avoided. This held with one-way sensitivity analysis.
CONCLUSION: Taurolidine-citrate in the primary prevention of CRBSIs in patients with CIF receiving HPN is associated with reduced hospital costs and infection rates.