IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharmo/v3y2019i2d10.1007_s41669-018-0090-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Single-Use EEG Cup Electrodes Compared with Reusable EEG Cup Electrodes

Author

Listed:
  • Anne Sohrt

    (Ambu A/S)

  • Anders Mærkedahl

    (Ambu A/S)

  • William V. Padula

    (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)

Abstract

Background Hospital-acquired infections are one of the most frequent adverse events among patients receiving healthcare. Reusable electroencephalography cup electrodes (EEG-CE) pose a risk of infection due to cross-contamination, which can be eliminated by replacing reusable EEG-CE with single-use EEG-CE. Objective The objective was to investigate the cost effectiveness of using single-use EEG-CE instead of reusable EEG-CE when the risk of sepsis is considered. Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted, using a decision analytic model to assess the potential effects and costs of using single-use EEG-CE as an alternative to reusable EEG-CE. The cost data regarding the reusable EEG-CE were assessed through interviews with four hospitals. To identify the risk of sepsis, a retrospective observational cohort study was conducted using data from Truven Health Analytics, with a total of 73,834 patients analyzed in the USA during 1 February 2014 through 15 December 2014. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was conducted to test the impact of the variables simultaneously and the robustness of the result. Results The incidence of sepsis was 33 cases per 100,000 EEG procedures. The acquisition and reprocessing costs of reusable EEG-CE were $US3.25 and $US5.57, respectively. The base-case analysis showed that single-use EEG-CE are cost effective compared with reusable EEG-CE, although the decision was not robust, with the PSA showing that 40% of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios indicated that single-use EEG-CE were more effective but more expensive. Conclusion This study indicates single-use EEG-CE are associated with cost savings and a possible reduction in the risk of cross-contamination.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne Sohrt & Anders Mærkedahl & William V. Padula, 2019. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Single-Use EEG Cup Electrodes Compared with Reusable EEG Cup Electrodes," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 265-272, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:3:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s41669-018-0090-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s41669-018-0090-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41669-018-0090-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41669-018-0090-3?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
    ---><---

    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:pharmo:v:3:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s41669-018-0090-3. 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: 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.