IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0214222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The cost impact of PCT-guided antibiotic stewardship versus usual care for hospitalised patients with suspected sepsis or lower respiratory tract infections in the US: A health economic model analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Janne C Mewes
  • Michael S Pulia
  • Michael K Mansour
  • Michael R Broyles
  • H Bryant Nguyen
  • Lotte M Steuten

Abstract

Background: Procalcitonin is a biomarker that supports clinical decision-making on when to initiate and discontinue antibiotic therapy. Several cost (-effectiveness) analyses have been conducted on Procalcitonin-guided antibiotic stewardship, but none mainly based on US originated data. Objective: To compare effectiveness and costs of a Procalcitonin-algorithm versus standard care to guide antibiotic prescription for patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of suspected sepsis or lower respiratory tract infection in the US. Methods: A previously published health economic decision model was used to compare the costs and effects of Procalcitonin-guided care. The analysis considered the societal and hospital perspective with a time horizon covering the length of hospital stay. The main outcomes were total costs per patient, including treatment costs and productivity losses, the number of patients with antibiotic resistance or C.difficile infections, and costs per antibiotic day avoided. Results: Procalcitonin -guided care for hospitalized patients with suspected sepsis and lower respiratory tract infection is associated with a reduction in antibiotic days, a shorter length of stay on the regular ward and the intensive care unit, shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, and fewer patients at risk for antibiotic resistant or C.difficile infection. Total costs in the Procalcitonin-group compared to standard care were reduced by 26.0% in sepsis and 17.7% in lower respiratory tract infection (total incremental costs of −$11,311 per patient and −$2,867 per patient respectively). Conclusions: Using a Procalcitonin-algorithm to guide antibiotic use in sepsis and hospitalised lower respiratory tract infection patients is expected to generate cost-savings to the hospital and lower rates of antibiotic resistance and C.difficile infections.

Suggested Citation

  • Janne C Mewes & Michael S Pulia & Michael K Mansour & Michael R Broyles & H Bryant Nguyen & Lotte M Steuten, 2019. "The cost impact of PCT-guided antibiotic stewardship versus usual care for hospitalised patients with suspected sepsis or lower respiratory tract infections in the US: A health economic model analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-16, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0214222
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214222
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0214222
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0214222&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0214222?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Simon van der Pol & Paula Rojas Garcia & Maarten J. Postma & Fernando Antoñanzas Villar & Antoinette D. I. Asselt, 2021. "Economic Analyses of Respiratory Tract Infection Diagnostics: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(12), pages 1411-1427, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0214222. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.