IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v20y2022i6d10.1007_s40258-022-00748-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Temocillin Treatment in Patients with Febrile UTI Accounting for the Emergence of Antibiotic Resistance

Author

Listed:
  • Sofie Larsson

    (Public Health Agency of Sweden
    University of Gothenburg)

  • Charlotta Edlund

    (Public Health Agency of Sweden)

  • Pontus Nauclér

    (Karolinska Institute)

  • Mikael Svensson

    (University of Gothenburg)

  • Anders Ternhag

    (Public Health Agency of Sweden
    Karolinska Institute)

Abstract

Background Antibiotic resistance has been listed as one of the biggest threats to global health today. A recent study has shown that treating febrile urinary tract infections with temocillin instead of cefotaxime leads to a reduced selection of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. However, a potential challenge with prioritizing temocillin over cefotaxime is the cost consequences. Objective This study aimed to assess the cost effectiveness of using temocillin compared to cefotaxime in treating febrile urinary tract infections in a model that takes the emergence of antibiotic resistance into account. Methods We used a Markov cohort model to estimate the costs and health effects of temocillin and cefotaxime treatment in febrile urinary tract infections in a Swedish setting. Health effects were assessed in terms of quality-adjusted life-years, and the primary outcome was the cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained with temocillin compared to cefotaxime. We used a 5-year time horizon. Results The model results showed that temocillin treatment led to better health outcomes at a higher total cost. The cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained was approximately 38,400 EUR. Results from the sensitivity analysis suggested a 63% probability of temocillin being cost effective at a threshold of 50,000 EUR. Furthermore, results showed that the cost effectiveness of temocillin in febrile urinary tract infections is highly dependent on the drug cost. Conclusions As antibiotic consumption is a driving force of resistance, it is essential to consider the development of resistance when studying the health economic consequences of antibiotic treatments. In doing so, this study found temocillin to be cost effective for febrile urinary tract infections.

Suggested Citation

  • Sofie Larsson & Charlotta Edlund & Pontus Nauclér & Mikael Svensson & Anders Ternhag, 2022. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Temocillin Treatment in Patients with Febrile UTI Accounting for the Emergence of Antibiotic Resistance," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 835-843, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:20:y:2022:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-022-00748-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-022-00748-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-022-00748-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-022-00748-7?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shah, Koonal K., 2009. "Severity of illness and priority setting in healthcare: A review of the literature," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(2-3), pages 77-84, December.
    2. Karlsberg Schaffer, S. & West, P. & Towse, A. & Henshall, C. & Mestre-Ferrandiz, J. & Masterson, R. & Fischer, A., 2017. "Additional Elements of Value for Health Technology Assessment Decisions," Briefings 001851, Office of Health Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matthijs M. Versteegh & Isaac Corro Ramos & Nasuh C. Buyukkaramikli & Amir Ansaripour & Vivian T. Reckers-Droog & Werner B. F. Brouwer, 2019. "Severity-Adjusted Probability of Being Cost Effective," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(9), pages 1155-1163, September.
    2. Erik Nord, 2015. "Cost-Value Analysis of Health Interventions: Introduction and Update on Methods and Preference Data," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 89-95, February.
    3. McHugh, Neil & Pinto-Prades, José Luis & Baker, Rachel & Mason, Helen & Donaldson, Cam, 2020. "Exploring the relative value of end of life QALYs: Are the comparators important?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    4. Anna Nicolet & Antoinette D I van Asselt & Karin M Vermeulen & Paul F M Krabbe, 2020. "Value judgment of new medical treatments: Societal and patient perspectives to inform priority setting in The Netherlands," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, July.
    5. Donna Rowen & John Brazier & Anju Keetharuth & Aki Tsuchiya & Clara Mukuria, 2016. "Comparison of Modes of Administration and Alternative Formats for Eliciting Societal Preferences for Burden of Illness," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 89-104, February.
    6. Liesbet Wetering & Job Exel & Ana Bobinac & Werner Brouwer, 2015. "Valuing QALYs in Relation to Equity Considerations Using a Discrete Choice Experiment," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(12), pages 1289-1300, December.
    7. Donna Rowen & John Brazier & Clara Mukuria & Anju Keetharuth & Arne Risa Hole & Aki Tsuchiya & Sophie Whyte & Phil Shackley, 2016. "Eliciting Societal Preferences for Weighting QALYs for Burden of Illness and End of Life," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(2), pages 210-222, February.
    8. Hannah Christensen & Hareth Al-Janabi & Pierre Levy & Maarten J. Postma & David E. Bloom & Paolo Landa & Oliver Damm & David M. Salisbury & Javier Diez-Domingo & Adrian K. Towse & Paula K. Lorgelly & , 2020. "Economic evaluation of meningococcal vaccines: considerations for the future," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(2), pages 297-309, March.
    9. Kevin Marsh & Nicolas Krucien, 2022. "Evaluating the Consistency of Patient Preference Estimates: Systematic Variation in Survival—Adverse Event Trade-Offs in Patients with Cancer or Cardiovascular Disease," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 15(1), pages 69-75, January.
    10. Lesley Chim & Glenn Salkeld & Patrick Kelly & Wendy Lipworth & Dyfrig A Hughes & Martin R Stockler, 2017. "Societal perspective on access to publicly subsidised medicines: A cross sectional survey of 3080 adults in Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-24, March.
    11. Koonal Shah & Aki Tsuchiya & Allan Wailoo, 2014. "Valuing health at the end of life: an empirical study of public preferences," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(4), pages 389-399, May.
    12. Broqvist, Mari & Sandman, Lars & Garpenby, Peter & Krevers, Barbro, 2018. "The meaning of severity – do citizenś views correspond to a severity framework based on ethical principles for priority setting?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(6), pages 630-637.
    13. Joseph Millum, 2023. "Should health research funding be proportional to the burden of disease?," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 22(1), pages 76-99, February.
    14. Adrian Towse;Jimena Ferraro;Jorge Mestre-Ferrandiz, 2017. "Incentives for New Drugs to Tackle Anti-Microbial Resistance," Briefing 001842, Office of Health Economics.
    15. Margherita Neri;Adrian Towse, 2017. "Antimicrobials Resistance: A Call for Multi-disciplinary Action. How Can HTA Help?," Briefing 001922, Office of Health Economics.
    16. Erik Nord & Jose Luis Pinto & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel & Peter Ubel, 1999. "Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 25-39, February.
    17. Jeremiah Hurley & Emmanouil Mentzakis & Mita Giacomini & Deirdre DeJean & Michel Grignon, 2017. "Non-market resource allocation and the public’s interpretation of need: an empirical investigation in the context of health care," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 49(1), pages 117-143, June.
    18. Shah, Koonal K. & Tsuchiya, Aki & Wailoo, Allan J., 2015. "Valuing health at the end of life: A stated preference discrete choice experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 48-56.
    19. Nord, Erik & Johansen, Rune, 2014. "Concerns for severity in priority setting in health care: A review of trade-off data in preference studies and implications for societal willingness to pay for a QALY," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 281-288.
    20. Takeru Shiroiwa & Shinya Saito & Kojiro Shimozuma & Satoshi Kodama & Shinichi Noto & Takashi Fukuda, 2016. "Societal Preferences for Interventions with the Same Efficiency: Assessment and Application to Decision Making," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 375-385, June.

    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:spr:aphecp:v:20:y:2022:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-022-00748-7. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.