Partner PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory SpA, Industry Pharma, Milan, Italy.
Minerva Med. 2010 Oct;101(5):319-28.
Tigecycline is a broad spectrum antibiotic indicated by official and health ministry guidelines for use in second course therapy for complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAI). In certain objective and subjective circumstances, however, its use in first-line therapy may be appropriate. Without entering into a detailed evaluation of use appropriateness, the aim of this study was to determine the economic impact on hospital budget expenditure for two different prescribing practices: use of tigecycline in second or first-line therapy. This empirical study was carried out at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) (chief, Dr. Alberto Costantini), Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona.
Cost determination was based on health care processes as revealed by field survey at the ICU. Mapping of the health care processes was not derived from official protocols or from an ex post analysis of medical records but rather directly from descriptions of the processes as referred by the ICU physicians and health care staff, and then summarized in flow charts and approved by the ICU chief.
The assumption was that tigecycline, because it has a broader spectrum of action than a first-line antibiotic, would more probably clear infections when used in the first course of antibiotic therapy. Notwithstanding this advantage, tigecycline has a higher daily dose cost than first-line antibiotics. This study compared the higher costs incurred by the use of tigecycline as a first-line antibiotic versus potential savings obtained with such use, also in view of the prevention of possible treatment failures and the additional cost of administering a second course of antibiotic therapy, wherein the result would depend on the number of preventable treatment failures.
The analysis concludes with a discussion and graphic illustrations comparing the differential probable treatment success which would render the two treatment alternatives economically indifferent.
替加环素是一种广谱抗生素,官方和卫生部指南都将其用于治疗复杂的腹腔内感染(cIAI)的二线治疗。然而,在某些客观和主观情况下,其一线治疗可能是合适的。本研究不详细评估使用的适宜性,目的是确定两种不同给药方案对医院预算支出的经济影响:替加环素用于二线或一线治疗。这项实证研究是在安科纳的综合医院重症监护病房(ICU)(主任 Alberto Costantini 博士)进行的。
成本确定基于 ICU 实地调查揭示的医疗保健流程。医疗保健流程的映射不是来自官方协议,也不是对病历的事后分析,而是直接来自 ICU 医生和医疗保健人员的流程描述,然后总结在流程图中,并由 ICU 主任批准。
假设替加环素由于其作用谱比一线抗生素更广,因此在一线抗生素治疗中更有可能清除感染。尽管有这个优势,但替加环素的日剂量成本高于一线抗生素。本研究比较了将替加环素用作一线抗生素所产生的较高成本与这种使用可能带来的潜在节省,还考虑了预防可能的治疗失败以及管理二线抗生素治疗的额外成本,其结果将取决于可预防的治疗失败的数量。
分析以讨论和图形说明结束,比较了两种治疗方案的差异,这将使两种治疗方案在经济上无差异。