• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

替考拉宁和头孢曲松的成本效益:每日一次抗生素治疗方案

Cost effectiveness of teicoplanin and ceftriaxone: a once-daily antibiotic regimen.

作者信息

Schaison G S

机构信息

Hospital St. Louis, Paris, France.

出版信息

Hosp Formul. 1993 Jan;28 Suppl 1:20-2.

PMID:10123833
Abstract

There is a high incidence of staphylococcal infection in febrile neutropenic children with a central venous line. These patients are usually initially treated with empiric antimicrobial therapy that provides broad spectrum coverage. In a study evaluating a conventional regimen of vancomycin 40 mg/kg/d plus ceftazidime 100 mg/kg/d given in three divided doses to 41 febrile children with leukemia or lymphoma, the response rate was 87% after a mean treatment duration of 16 days. A once-daily regimen of an investigational antibiotic, teicoplanin, 10 mg/kg/d and ceftriaxone 50 mg/kg/d evaluated in 47 febrile children with leukemia was found to produce an equivalent rate of success and require the same mean duration of therapy. A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the economic impact of replacing the conventional regimen with once-daily teicoplanin-ceftriaxone revealed that a 16-day course of the latter treatment would produce cost savings in terms of the cost of the antibiotics and other nonreusable materials, as well as in nursing time. Using French drug pricing data, the savings calculated for drugs and materials were 478 FF ($80 US). The teicoplanin-ceftriaxone regimen saved approximately 14 hours in nursing time per patient. Extrapolations based on estimates of hospital occupancy and the ratio of days a patient receives antibiotic therapy to the total duration of hospital stay suggest that an average hospital ward could achieve monthly costsavings of 7,641 FF ($1,273 US) for antibiotics and materials.

摘要

患有中心静脉导管的发热性中性粒细胞减少儿童葡萄球菌感染的发生率很高。这些患者通常最初接受经验性抗菌治疗,以提供广谱覆盖。在一项研究中,对41名患有白血病或淋巴瘤的发热儿童采用常规方案,即万古霉素40mg/kg/d加头孢他啶100mg/kg/d,分三次给药,平均治疗16天后,有效率为87%。在47名患有白血病的发热儿童中评估了一种试验性抗生素替考拉宁10mg/kg/d和头孢曲松50mg/kg/d的每日一次方案,发现其成功率相当,且平均治疗持续时间相同。一项成本效益分析比较了用每日一次的替考拉宁-头孢曲松替代传统方案的经济影响,结果显示,后一种治疗方案的16天疗程在抗生素和其他不可重复使用材料的成本以及护理时间方面都能节省费用。根据法国药品定价数据,计算出的药品和材料节省费用为478法郎(80美元)。替考拉宁-头孢曲松方案每名患者节省了约14小时的护理时间。根据医院入住率估计以及患者接受抗生素治疗天数与住院总天数的比例进行推断,表明一个普通医院病房每月在抗生素和材料方面可节省7641法郎(1273美元)。

相似文献

1
Cost effectiveness of teicoplanin and ceftriaxone: a once-daily antibiotic regimen.替考拉宁和头孢曲松的成本效益:每日一次抗生素治疗方案
Hosp Formul. 1993 Jan;28 Suppl 1:20-2.
2
Randomized prospective study comparing cost-effectiveness of teicoplanin and vancomycin as second-line empiric therapy for infection in neutropenic patients.比较替考拉宁和万古霉素作为中性粒细胞减少患者感染二线经验性治疗的成本效益的随机前瞻性研究。
Haematologica. 1999 Mar;84(3):231-6.
3
Teicoplanin vs vancomycin: cost-effectiveness comparisons.替考拉宁与万古霉素:成本效益比较
Hosp Formul. 1993 Jan;28 Suppl 1:28-32.
4
Clinical efficacy, tolerability, and cost savings associated with the use of open-label metronidazole plus ceftriaxone once daily compared with ticarcillin/clavulanate every 6 hours as empiric treatment for diabetic lower-extremity infections in older males.与每6小时使用替卡西林/克拉维酸相比,每日一次使用开放标签甲硝唑加头孢曲松作为老年男性糖尿病下肢感染经验性治疗的临床疗效、耐受性和成本节约情况。
Am J Geriatr Pharmacother. 2004 Sep;2(3):181-9. doi: 10.1016/j.amjopharm.2004.09.006.
5
A prospective, controlled, randomized, non-blind, comparative study of the efficacy and safety of a once daily high dose of ceftriaxone plus ciprofloxacin versus thrice daily ceftazidime plus amikacin in empirical therapy for febrile neutropenic patients.一项前瞻性、对照、随机、非盲、比较性研究,旨在对比每日一次大剂量头孢曲松加环丙沙星与每日三次头孢他啶加阿米卡星在发热性中性粒细胞减少患者经验性治疗中的疗效和安全性。
Eur J Intern Med. 2008 Dec;19(8):619-24. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2007.08.011. Epub 2008 Apr 29.
6
Treatment of urinary tract infections among febrile young children with daily intravenous antibiotic therapy at a day treatment center.在日间治疗中心对发热幼儿的尿路感染采用每日静脉注射抗生素疗法进行治疗。
Pediatrics. 2004 Oct;114(4):e469-76. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-0421.
7
Ceftriaxone alone or in Combination with Teicoplanin in the Management of Febrile Episodes in Neutropenic Children and Adolescents with Cancer on an Outpatient Base.头孢曲松单独或与替考拉宁联合用于门诊治疗癌症中性粒细胞减少儿童和青少年发热性疾病
Klin Padiatr. 1993 Jul-Aug;205(4):295-9. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1025240.
8
Cost-effectiveness of ceftriaxone and amikacin as single daily dose for the empirical management of febrile granulocytopenic children with cancer.头孢曲松和阿米卡星每日单次给药用于癌症发热性粒细胞减少症患儿经验性治疗的成本效益分析
Chemotherapy. 1997 Sep-Oct;43(5):358-66. doi: 10.1159/000239590.
9
Early hospital discharge versus continued hospitalization in febrile pediatric cancer patients with prolonged neutropenia: A randomized, prospective study.发热性长期中性粒细胞减少的儿科癌症患者早期出院与继续住院治疗的比较:一项随机前瞻性研究。
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2007 Nov;49(6):786-92. doi: 10.1002/pbc.21179.
10
Current treatment of gram-positive infections: focus on efficacy, safety, and cost minimalization analysis of teicoplanin.
Hosp Formul. 1992 Dec;27(12):1199-200, 1203-4, 1207-10.

引用本文的文献

1
Staphylococcal skin infections in children: rational drug therapy recommendations.儿童葡萄球菌皮肤感染:合理用药治疗建议
Paediatr Drugs. 2005;7(2):77-102. doi: 10.2165/00148581-200507020-00002.
2
Teicoplanin. A pharmacoeconomic evaluation of its use in the treatment of gram-positive infections.替考拉宁:对其用于治疗革兰氏阳性菌感染的药物经济学评价
Pharmacoeconomics. 1995 Apr;7(4):357-74. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199507040-00009.
3
[Febrile neutropenia: practical aspects].[发热性中性粒细胞减少症:实际问题]
Med Klin (Munich). 1998 Oct 15;93(10):598-611. doi: 10.1007/BF03042675.
4
Use of teicoplanin in community medicine.替考拉宁在社区医疗中的应用。
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1994 Sep;13(9):701-10. doi: 10.1007/BF02276052.