• 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

比较注射吸毒住院患者严重革兰阳性感染时继续使用达巴万星与仅使用标准护理抗生素的成本评估。

Cost evaluation of continuation of therapy with dalbavancin compared to standard-of-care antibiotics alone in hospitalized persons who inject drugs with severe gram-positive infections.

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy, University of Rochester Medical Center: Strong Memorial Hospital, Rochester, NY, USA.

PRIME Education, LLC, New York, NY, USA.

出版信息

Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2024 May 24;81(Supplement_2):S40-S48. doi: 10.1093/ajhp/zxae025.

DOI:10.1093/ajhp/zxae025
PMID:38465838
Abstract

PURPOSE

Persons who inject drugs (PWID) are at risk for severe gram-positive infections and may require prolonged hospitalization and intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy. Dalbavancin (DBV) is a long-acting lipoglycopeptide that may reduce costs and provide effective treatment in this population.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of PWID with severe gram-positive infections. Patients admitted from January 1, 2017, to November 1, 2019 (standard-of-care [SOC] group) and from November 15, 2019, to March 31, 2022 (DBV group) were included. The primary outcome was the total cost to the healthcare system. Secondary outcomes included hospital days saved and treatment failure.

RESULTS

A total of 87 patients were included (37 in the DBV group and 50 in the SOC group). Patients were a median of 34 years old and were predominantly Caucasian (82%). Staphylococcus aureus (82%) was the most common organism, and bacteremia (71%) was the most common type of infection. Compared to the SOC group, the DBV group would have had a median of 14 additional days of hospitalization if they had stayed to complete their therapy (P = 0.014). The median total cost to the healthcare system was significantly lower in the DBV group than in the SOC group ($31,698.00 vs $45,093.50; P = 0.035). The rate of treatment failure was similar between the groups (32.4% in the DBV group vs 36% in the SOC group; P = 0.729).

CONCLUSION

DBV is a cost-saving alternative to SOC IV antibiotics for severe gram-positive infections in PWID, with similar treatment outcomes. Larger prospective studies, including other patient populations, may demonstrate additional benefit.

摘要

目的

注射吸毒者(PWID)面临严重革兰阳性感染的风险,可能需要长时间住院和静脉(IV)抗生素治疗。达巴万星(DBV)是一种长效糖肽类抗生素,可能会降低成本并为该人群提供有效的治疗。

方法

这是一项对患有严重革兰阳性感染的 PWID 的回顾性研究。纳入了 2017 年 1 月 1 日至 2019 年 11 月 1 日(标准治疗 [SOC] 组)和 2019 年 11 月 15 日至 2022 年 3 月 31 日(DBV 组)期间住院的 PWID。主要结局是医疗系统总成本。次要结局包括节省的住院天数和治疗失败。

结果

共纳入 87 例患者(DBV 组 37 例,SOC 组 50 例)。患者的中位年龄为 34 岁,主要为白种人(82%)。金黄色葡萄球菌(82%)是最常见的病原体,菌血症(71%)是最常见的感染类型。如果 DBV 组继续完成治疗,他们的中位住院时间将比 SOC 组多 14 天(P = 0.014)。DBV 组的医疗系统总成本中位数明显低于 SOC 组(31698.00 美元 vs 45093.50 美元;P = 0.035)。两组的治疗失败率相似(DBV 组为 32.4%,SOC 组为 36%;P = 0.729)。

结论

DBV 是治疗 PWID 严重革兰阳性感染的 SOC IV 抗生素的一种具有成本效益的替代方案,其治疗效果相似。更大规模的前瞻性研究,包括其他患者群体,可能会显示出额外的益处。

相似文献

1
Cost evaluation of continuation of therapy with dalbavancin compared to standard-of-care antibiotics alone in hospitalized persons who inject drugs with severe gram-positive infections.比较注射吸毒住院患者严重革兰阳性感染时继续使用达巴万星与仅使用标准护理抗生素的成本评估。
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2024 May 24;81(Supplement_2):S40-S48. doi: 10.1093/ajhp/zxae025.
2
Dalbavancin use in an academic medical centre and associated cost savings.达巴万星在学术医疗中心的应用及相关成本节约。
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2019 Nov;54(5):652-654. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2019.08.007. Epub 2019 Aug 6.
3
Comparison of dalbavancin to standard-of-care for outpatient treatment of invasive Gram-positive infections.比较达巴万星与标准护理在门诊治疗侵袭性革兰阳性感染中的疗效。
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020 Dec;56(6):106210. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.106210. Epub 2020 Oct 23.
4
Hospital resource use and cost of treatment with linezolid versus teicoplanin for treatment of serious gram-positive bacterial infections among hospitalized patients from South America and Mexico: results from a multicenter trial.利奈唑胺与替考拉宁治疗南美洲和墨西哥住院患者严重革兰氏阳性菌感染的医院资源利用及治疗成本:一项多中心试验的结果
Clin Ther. 2003 Jun;25(6):1846-71. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(03)80173-x.
5
DALBACEN cohort: dalbavancin as consolidation therapy in patients with endocarditis and/or bloodstream infection produced by gram-positive cocci.DALBACEN 队列研究:达巴万星治疗革兰阳性球菌引起的心内膜炎和/或血流感染患者的巩固治疗。
Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2019 Oct 19;18(1):30. doi: 10.1186/s12941-019-0329-6.
6
Pharmacokinetic drug evaluation of dalbavancin for the treatment of skin infections.达巴万星治疗皮肤感染的药代动力学药物评价
Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2018 Feb;14(2):197-206. doi: 10.1080/17425255.2018.1420162. Epub 2017 Dec 25.
7
A retrospective multicentre study on dalbavancin effectiveness and cost-evaluation in sternotomic wound infection treatment: DALBA SWIT Study.一项关于达巴万星治疗胸骨切开术后伤口感染有效性及成本评估的回顾性多中心研究:DALBA SWIT研究
J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2022 Sep;30:390-394. doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2022.07.018. Epub 2022 Jul 22.
8
Dalbavancin Efficacy and Impact on Hospital Length-of-Stay and Treatment Costs in Different Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections.达巴万星治疗不同革兰阳性菌感染的疗效及其对住院时间和治疗费用的影响。
Clin Drug Investig. 2021 May;41(5):437-448. doi: 10.1007/s40261-021-01028-3. Epub 2021 Apr 21.
9
A cost-minimization analysis of dalbavancin compared to conventional therapy for the outpatient treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections.一项关于达巴万星与传统疗法治疗门诊急性细菌性皮肤和皮肤结构感染的成本最小化分析。
Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2018 Mar;19(4):319-325. doi: 10.1080/14656566.2018.1442439. Epub 2018 Mar 6.
10
Outcomes of Partial Oral Antibiotic Treatment for Complicated Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia in People Who Inject Drugs.接受部分口服抗生素治疗的药物滥用者中合并金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症的结局。
Clin Infect Dis. 2023 Feb 8;76(3):487-496. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciac714.