Suppr超能文献

利奈唑胺与万古霉素治疗人工关节感染的成本分析。

Linezolid versus vancomycin for prosthetic joint infections: a cost analysis.

作者信息

You J H S, Lee G C H, So R K H, Cheung K W, Hui M

机构信息

Centre for Pharmacoeconomics Research, School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong.

出版信息

Infection. 2007 Jun;35(4):265-70. doi: 10.1007/s15010-007-6304-8. Epub 2007 Jul 23.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) caused by methicillin-resistant gram-positive bacteria are primarily treated by intravenous vancomycin. Linezolid, active against methicillin-resistant strains and available in oral and intravenous dosage forms, is a potential alternative to vancomycin for the treatment of PJIs.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the cost of linezolid therapy (outpatient setting) and vancomycin therapy (inpatient and outpatient settings) for PJIs caused by methicillin-resistant gram-positive bacteria.

METHODS

A decision tree was designed to simulate the clinical outcome and healthcare resource utilization of linezolid, vancomycin by outpatient and home parenteral antimicrobial therapies (OHPAT) and vancomycin administered in inpatient setting (rehabilitation facility) for patients with PJIs caused by methicillin-resistant strains. Clinical inputs were estimated from literature and the cost analysis was conducted from the perspective of the public healthcare provider in Hong Kong.

RESULTS

The base-case analysis showed that the vancomycin (OHPAT) group (USD14,470 per patient) was the least costly alternative, followed by the linezolid group (USD17,877 per patient) and the vancomycin (rehabilitation) group (USD19,980 per patient) (1USD = 7.8HKD). The clinical treatment success rates of vancomycin and linezolid were influential factors. Monte Carlo 10,000 simulations showed that the vancomycin (OHPAT) group was less costly than the arms of linezolid and vancomycin (rehabilitation) 64% and 100% of the time, respectively. The linezolid group was less costly than the vancomycin (rehabilitation) group in 65%of the times.

CONCLUSION

Home-infusion of vancomycin therapy appears to be the least costly treatment approach for PJIs caused by methicillin-resistant gram-positive bacteria from the perspective of a Hong Kong public health organization.

摘要

背景

耐甲氧西林革兰氏阳性菌引起的人工关节感染(PJI)主要通过静脉注射万古霉素进行治疗。利奈唑胺对耐甲氧西林菌株有效,有口服和静脉剂型,是治疗PJI时替代万古霉素的一种潜在选择。

目的

分析耐甲氧西林革兰氏阳性菌引起的PJI采用利奈唑胺治疗(门诊环境)和万古霉素治疗(住院和门诊环境)的成本。

方法

设计了一个决策树,以模拟耐甲氧西林菌株引起的PJI患者采用利奈唑胺、门诊和家庭肠外抗菌治疗(OHPAT)的万古霉素以及住院环境(康复机构)使用的万古霉素的临床结局和医疗资源利用情况。临床数据来自文献估计,成本分析是从香港公共医疗服务提供者的角度进行的。

结果

基础病例分析表明,万古霉素(OHPAT)组(每位患者14,470美元)是成本最低的选择,其次是利奈唑胺组(每位患者17,877美元)和万古霉素(康复)组(每位患者19,980美元)(1美元 = 7.8港元)。万古霉素和利奈唑胺的临床治疗成功率是影响因素。蒙特卡洛10,000次模拟显示,万古霉素(OHPAT)组分别在64%和100%的时间内成本低于利奈唑胺组和万古霉素(康复)组。利奈唑胺组在65%的时间内成本低于万古霉素(康复)组。

结论

从香港公共卫生组织的角度来看,万古霉素家庭输注疗法似乎是耐甲氧西林革兰氏阳性菌引起的PJI成本最低的治疗方法。

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