Comparison of Efficacy and Pharmacoeconomic Outcomes Between Calfactant and Poractant Alfa in Preterm Infants With Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Q2 Medicine
Annie Bui, Caitlin Schumann, Jennie Le, Treva Jones, Clair Schwendeman
{"title":"Comparison of Efficacy and Pharmacoeconomic Outcomes Between Calfactant and Poractant Alfa in Preterm Infants With Respiratory Distress Syndrome.","authors":"Annie Bui, Caitlin Schumann, Jennie Le, Treva Jones, Clair Schwendeman","doi":"10.5863/1551-6776-29.3.241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In order to evaluate the impact of the surfactant of choice selection, primary end points were to compare the average number of doses per patient, need for mechanical ventilation on day 3, hospital length of stay, and in-hospital mortality between calfactant and poractant alfa in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). Secondary outcomes included administration complications, development of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), and estimated average per patient cost among the study population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective chart review was performed at a level IV neonatal intensive care unit between January 2020 and December 2021 to compare the efficacy, safety, and pharmacoeconomic outcomes -following a surfactant of choice switch from calfactant to poractant alfa in preterm infants with RDS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Final analysis included 253 premature infants with gestational age (GA) between 22 and 36 weeks who met inclusion criteria. A total of 118 patients who received calfactant required higher average number of doses, 1.5 vs 1.3 doses (p = 0.031), and had more administration complications than 135 patients who received poractant alfa (10.2 vs 2.2%, p = 0.008). The need for redosing, mechanical ventilation on day 3, hospital length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and development of BPD were comparable between both groups. However, the estimated average per patient cost for poractant alfa was 32% higher than calfactant ($1,901 vs $1,439, p <0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite the pharmacoeconomic disadvantage, preterm infants who received poractant alfa needed fewer doses and were less likely to have administration complications compared with those who received calfactant.</p>","PeriodicalId":37484,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics","volume":"29 3","pages":"241-247"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11163911/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5863/1551-6776-29.3.241","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: In order to evaluate the impact of the surfactant of choice selection, primary end points were to compare the average number of doses per patient, need for mechanical ventilation on day 3, hospital length of stay, and in-hospital mortality between calfactant and poractant alfa in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). Secondary outcomes included administration complications, development of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), and estimated average per patient cost among the study population.

Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed at a level IV neonatal intensive care unit between January 2020 and December 2021 to compare the efficacy, safety, and pharmacoeconomic outcomes -following a surfactant of choice switch from calfactant to poractant alfa in preterm infants with RDS.

Results: Final analysis included 253 premature infants with gestational age (GA) between 22 and 36 weeks who met inclusion criteria. A total of 118 patients who received calfactant required higher average number of doses, 1.5 vs 1.3 doses (p = 0.031), and had more administration complications than 135 patients who received poractant alfa (10.2 vs 2.2%, p = 0.008). The need for redosing, mechanical ventilation on day 3, hospital length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and development of BPD were comparable between both groups. However, the estimated average per patient cost for poractant alfa was 32% higher than calfactant ($1,901 vs $1,439, p <0.001).

Conclusions: Despite the pharmacoeconomic disadvantage, preterm infants who received poractant alfa needed fewer doses and were less likely to have administration complications compared with those who received calfactant.

比较 Calfactant 和 Poractant Alfa 在早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征中的疗效和药物经济学结果。
研究目的为了评估选择表面活性物质的影响,主要终点是比较早产儿呼吸窘迫综合征(RDS)患者平均每人用药次数、第 3 天机械通气需求、住院时间以及钙actant 和 poractant alfa 的院内死亡率。次要结果包括用药并发症、支气管肺发育不良(BPD)的发生以及研究人群中每位患者的估计平均费用:在 2020 年 1 月至 2021 年 12 月期间,在一家 IV 级新生儿重症监护病房进行了一次回顾性病历审查,以比较早产儿 RDS 患者选择将表面活性剂从钙actant 转换为 poractant alfa 后的疗效、安全性和药物经济学结果:最终分析纳入了 253 名符合纳入标准的早产儿,其胎龄(GA)在 22 到 36 周之间。与接受孔乳剂 alfa 的 135 例患者(10.2% 对 2.2%,p = 0.008)相比,接受卡尔法特的 118 例患者所需的平均剂量更高,为 1.5 剂对 1.3 剂(p = 0.031),并且出现了更多的用药并发症。两组患者重新给药、第 3 天机械通气、住院时间、院内死亡率和 BPD 的发生率相当。然而,估计每名患者使用 poractant alfa 的平均成本要比 calfactant 高 32%(1,901 美元对 1,439 美元,p 结论:"poractant alfa 比 calfactant 高 32%":尽管存在药物经济学上的劣势,但与使用 calfactant 的早产儿相比,使用 poractant alfa 的早产儿所需的剂量更少,出现用药并发症的可能性也更小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics Medicine-Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
90
期刊介绍: The Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics is the official journal of the Pediatric Pharmacy Advocacy Group. JPPT is a peer-reviewed multi disciplinary journal that is devoted to promoting the safe and effective use of medications in infants and children. To this end, the journal publishes practical information for all practitioners who provide care to pediatric patients. Each issue includes review articles, original clinical investigations, case reports, editorials, and other information relevant to pediatric medication therapy. The Journal focuses all work on issues related to the practice of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics. The scope of content includes pharmacotherapy, extemporaneous compounding, dosing, methods of medication administration, medication error prevention, and legislative issues. The Journal will contain original research, review articles, short subjects, case reports, clinical investigations, editorials, and news from such organizations as the Pediatric Pharmacy Advocacy Group, the FDA, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, and so on.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信