 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Research Articles |
OBJECTIVE: To determine if dual individualization of cefmenoxime dosing is cost-effective. DESIGN: Retrospective, pharmacoeconomic decision analysis of two consecutively conducted prospective clinical studies. PATIENTS: Patients with documented gram-negative nosocomial pneumonia were evaluated. Thirty-three patients received cefmenoxime at standard dosing and 28 patients received doses according to dual individualization methodology. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Antibiotic and infection-related costs were compared between groups. The number of hospital antibiotic days and costs incurred on those days were also evaluated. A decision model was constructed to characterize differences in treatment outcome. Probabilities within the decision tree were derived from 61 evaluable patients. Cost-effectiveness and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. Sensitivity analysis was performed by varying outcome probabilities, antibiotic prices, and hospital room costs. RESULTS: Antibiotic and infection-related costs (mean +/- SEM) were $848 +/- 78 for standard cefmenoxime dosing and $1123 +/- 128 for dual individualization (p < 0.05). Total hospital costs were $10,660 +/- 1432 for standard dosing and $11,709 +/- 1900 for dual individualization (p > 0.05). Median antibiotic length of stay (ALOS) was 15.2 and 12.7 days for standard and dual individualization methodologies, respectively (p > 0.05). Incremental analysis of cost-effectiveness indicated that a similar reduction in length of stay for 259 dual individualization patients would save $321,808 annually. CONCLUSIONS: Sensitivity analysis indicates that, by reducing ALOS, dual individualization could be a cost-effective method of beta-lactam dosing for patients with pneumonia. A prospective study should be conducted to validate these findings.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. L Kane-Gill, K. M Olsen, J. A Rebuck, R. S Rea, D W. Boatwright, M. A Smythe, T. R Walker, S. L Lager, T. Hodgman, and for the Aspiration Evaluation Group of the Clinica Multicenter Treatment and Outcome Evaluation of Aspiration Syndromes in Critically Ill Patients Ann. Pharmacother., April 1, 2007; 41(4): 549 - 555. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. E. Ost, C. S. Hall, G. Joseph, C. Ginocchio, S. Condon, E. Kao, M. LaRusso, R. Itzla, and A. M. Fein Decision Analysis of Antibiotic and Diagnostic Strategies in Ventilator-associated Pneumonia Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., November 1, 2003; 168(9): 1060 - 1067. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. A. Paladino, L. D. Gudgel, A. Forrest, and M. S. Niederman Cost-Effectiveness of IV-to-Oral Switch Therapy: Azithromycin vs Cefuroxime With or Without Erythromycin for the Treatment of Community-Acquired Pneumonia Chest, October 1, 2002; 122(4): 1271 - 1279. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. D. Dresser, M. S. Niederman, and J. A. Paladino Cost-effectiveness of Gatifloxacin vs Ceftriaxone With a Macrolide for the Treatment of Community-Acquired Pneumonia Chest, May 1, 2001; 119(5): 1439 - 1448. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
