Western Health, Gordon Street, Footscray, VIC 3011, Australia.
Western Health, Gordon Street, Footscray, VIC 3011, Australia Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Level 4, 207 Bouverie Street, The University of Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia.
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016 Mar;71(3):830-5. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkv413. Epub 2015 Dec 24.
The majority of healthcare costs accrued managing cellulitis can be attributed to the small proportion of patients treated with parenteral antibiotics. Hospital in the home (HITH) instead of or following initial inpatient treatment is a safe and effective alternative, but there are few data evaluating its cost-effectiveness for cellulitis.
Our retrospective cohort study included all treatment episodes (by either HITH or an inpatient service for >24 h) with an ICD-10 primary diagnosis code of lower-leg cellulitis at a tertiary-level health service in Melbourne, Australia over 12 months (2012-13). Data included demography, social factors and ICD-10 codes mapped to major comorbidities constituting the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). Differences in length of stay (LOS) and individual clinical costing (ICC) between HITH- and non-HITH-treated patients were tested with univariable and multivariable (generalized linear model) analyses.
For 328 admissions in 294 patients, the average per-day costs were AU$431 for HITH and AU$761 for inpatient care. For 124 patients (38%) treated in HITH, both LOS [mean (95% CI) 7.48 days (6.76-8.20 days) versus 5.82 days (3.45-8.18 days)] and ICC [mean (95% CI) AU$5873 (AU$5212-AU$6534) versus AU$5196 (AU$4567- AU$5824)] were higher than those for patients with solely inpatient care. In multivariable analysis controlling for age, comorbidity, carer support and language, HITH remained associated with significantly longer LOS [1.63-fold (95% CI: 1.24- to 2.13-fold): P < 0.001] and non-significantly with higher cost [1.14-fold (95% CI: 0.97- to 1.34-fold): P = 0.11].
Management of cellulitis represents a substantial cost burden for hospital services. Modest per-day cost savings from HITH can be offset by much longer HITH LOS.
管理蜂窝织炎所产生的大部分医疗费用都归因于一小部分接受静脉抗生素治疗的患者。家庭住院(HITH)替代或作为初始住院治疗后的治疗方法是一种安全有效的选择,但很少有数据评估其对蜂窝织炎的成本效益。
我们的回顾性队列研究包括在澳大利亚墨尔本的一家三级保健服务机构在 12 个月(2012-13 年)期间,ICD-10 主要诊断代码为小腿蜂窝织炎的所有治疗病例(HITH 或住院治疗超过 24 小时)。数据包括人口统计学、社会因素和 ICD-10 代码,这些代码映射到构成 Charlson 合并症指数(CCI)的主要合并症。用单变量和多变量(广义线性模型)分析测试 HITH 和非 HITH 治疗患者的住院时间(LOS)和个体临床成本(ICC)差异。
在 294 名患者的 328 次入院中,HITH 的平均每日费用为 431 澳元,住院治疗的费用为 761 澳元。在 124 名(38%)接受 HITH 治疗的患者中,LOS [平均(95%CI)7.48 天(6.76-8.20 天)与 5.82 天(3.45-8.18 天)]和 ICC [平均(95%CI)澳元 5873(澳元 5212-澳元 6534)与澳元 5196(澳元 4567-澳元 5824)]均高于单纯住院治疗的患者。在多变量分析中,控制年龄、合并症、照顾者支持和语言因素后,HITH 与 LOS 显著延长相关[1.63 倍(95%CI:1.24 至 2.13 倍):P<0.001],与成本显著增加无关[1.14 倍(95%CI:0.97 至 1.34 倍):P=0.11]。
蜂窝织炎的治疗给医院服务带来了巨大的成本负担。HITH 的每日适度节省成本可能会被 HITH 更长的 LOS 所抵消。