首页> 外文期刊>ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research >Economic burden of inpatient and outpatient antibiotic treatment for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus complicated skin and soft-tissue infections: a comparison of linezolid, vancomycin, and daptomycin
【24h】

Economic burden of inpatient and outpatient antibiotic treatment for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus complicated skin and soft-tissue infections: a comparison of linezolid, vancomycin, and daptomycin

机译:耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌并发皮肤和软组织感染的住院和门诊抗生素治疗的经济负担:利奈唑胺,万古霉素和达托霉素的比较

获取原文
       

摘要

Background: Previous economic analyses evaluating treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) complicated skin and soft-tissue infections (cSSTI) failed to include all direct treatment costs such as outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT). Our objective was to develop an economic model from a US payer perspective that includes all direct inpatient and outpatient costs incurred by patients with MRSA cSSTI receiving linezolid, vancomycin, or daptomycin. Methods: A 4-week decision model was developed for this economic analysis. Published literature and database analyses with validation by experts provided clinical, resource use, and cost inputs on data such as efficacy rate, length of stay, adverse events, and OPAT services. Base-case analysis assumed equal efficacy and equal length of stay for treatments. We conducted several sensitivity analyses where assumptions on resource use or efficacy were varied. Costs were reported in year-end 2011 US dollars. Results: Total treatment costs in the base-case were lower for linezolid ($10,571) than vancomycin ($11,096), and daptomycin ($13,612). Inpatient treatment costs were $740 more, but outpatient costs, $1,266 less with linezolid than vancomycin therapy due to a switch to oral linezolid when the patient was discharged. Compared with daptomycin, both inpatient and outpatient treatment costs were lower with linezolid by $87 and $2,954 respectively. In sensitivity analyses, linezolid had lower costs compared with vancomycin and daptomycin when using differential length of stay data from a clinical trial, and using success rates from a meta-analysis. In a scenario without peripherally inserted central catheter line costs, linezolid became slightly more expensive than vancomycin (by $285), but remained less costly than daptomycin (by $2,316). Conclusion: Outpatient costs of managing MRSA cSSTI may be reduced by 30%–50% with oral linezolid compared with vancomycin or daptomycin. Results from this analysis support potential economic benefit and cost savings of using linezolid versus traditional OPAT when total inpatient and outpatient medical costs are evaluated.
机译:背景:先前评估耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)并发皮肤和软组织感染(cSSTI)的治疗的经济分析未能涵盖所有直接治疗费用,例如门诊肠胃外抗生素治疗(OPAT)。我们的目标是从美国付款人的角度发展一种经济模型,其中包括由MRSA cSSTI接受利奈唑胺,万古霉素或达托霉素引起的所有直接住院和门诊费用。方法:为该经济分析开发了一个为期4周的决策模型。已发表的文献和经过专家确认的数据库分析提供了临床,资源使用和成本方面的数据输入,例如功效,住院时间,不良事件和OPAT服务。基本病例分析假设治疗的疗效相同且住院时间相同。我们进行了几次敏感性分析,对资源使用或功效的假设有所不同。成本以2011年底美元表示。结果:利奈唑胺(10,571美元)的基本治疗总成本低于万古霉素(11,096美元)和达托霉素(13,612美元)。与万古霉素相比,利奈唑胺的住院治疗费用增加了740美元,但门诊费用比利万古霉素减少了1,266美元,这是因为患者出院后改用口服利奈唑胺。与达托霉素相比,利奈唑胺的住院和门诊治疗费用分别降低了87美元和2,954美元。在敏感性分析中,使用来自临床试验的不同住院时间数据和荟萃分析的成功率,与万古霉素和达托霉素相比,利奈唑胺的成本较低。在没有外围插入中心导管的情况下,利奈唑胺的价格略高于万古霉素(285美元),但仍比达托霉素(2,316美元)便宜。结论:与万古霉素或达托霉素相比,口服利奈唑胺治疗MRSA cSSTI的门诊费用可降低30%–50%。当评估总住院和门诊医疗费用时,使用利奈唑胺与传统OPAT相比,该分析结果支持潜在的经济效益和成本节省。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号