Mohammed Solomon Ahmed, Roberts Jason A, Mirón-Rubio Manuel, López Cortés Luis Eduardo, Assefa Getnet Mengistu, Pollard James, McCarthy Kate, Gilchrist Mark, Cotta Menino, Sime Fekade B
UQ Centre for Clinical Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Department of Pharmacy, Wollo University, Dessie, Ethiopia.
JAC Antimicrob Resist. 2025 Apr 8;7(2):dlaf049. doi: 10.1093/jacamr/dlaf049. eCollection 2025 Apr.
The outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) programme was introduced to reduce costs and enhance the quality of life for patients requiring prolonged treatment with parenteral antimicrobials. However, given the escalating inflation, the extent of current cost savings achieved through OPAT programmes remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis employ a cost-minimization analysis to quantify the cost savings from OPAT compared to inpatient treatment.
The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched for studies comparing the costs of parenteral antimicrobial treatment without restriction on study design and year. Two reviewers conducted eligibility screening and cross-validated the extracted data. The cost data were adjusted and inflated to 2023 US dollars. A random effect model calculated mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024584201).
Twenty studies involving 2790 patients were included in the systematic review, and six studies (three randomized controlled trials and three cohorts) were subject to metanalysis. Collectively, these included 560 patients who received treatment in outpatient settings, and 491 treated as inpatients. The cost of parenteral antimicrobial per episode of care was lower in the outpatient settings MD -$5436.73 (95% CI: -$9589.24 to -$1284.22, I² = 96%; = 0.01) than in inpatient settings.
OPAT significantly saves costs compared to inpatient treatment. We recommend comprehensive analysis of treatment costs from all perspectives, including various cost types.
引入门诊胃肠外抗菌治疗(OPAT)计划是为了降低成本,并提高需要长期胃肠外抗菌治疗的患者的生活质量。然而,鉴于通货膨胀不断加剧,目前通过OPAT计划实现的成本节约程度仍不明确。本系统评价和荟萃分析采用成本最小化分析来量化与住院治疗相比,OPAT的成本节约情况。
检索Cochrane图书馆、MEDLINE、Embase、PubMed和Web of Science数据库,查找比较胃肠外抗菌治疗成本的研究,对研究设计和年份不设限制。两名评审员进行资格筛选,并对提取的数据进行交叉验证。成本数据进行了调整,并折算为2023年美元。采用随机效应模型计算平均差(MD)及95%置信区间(CI)。该综述方案已在PROSPERO(CRD42024584201)上注册。
系统评价纳入了20项涉及2790例患者的研究,6项研究(3项随机对照试验和3项队列研究)进行了荟萃分析。这些研究共纳入560例在门诊接受治疗的患者和491例住院治疗的患者。门诊环境中每次护理的胃肠外抗菌治疗成本低于住院环境,MD为-$5436.73(95%CI:-$9589.24至-$1284.22,I² = 96%;P = 0.01)。
与住院治疗相比,OPAT显著节约成本。我们建议从所有角度,包括各种成本类型,对治疗成本进行全面分析。