医院环境中MRSA载体快速检测的成本效益和效果分析。

Gay Henson, Elham Ghonim, Andrea Swiatlo, Shelia King, Kimberly S Moore, S Travis King, Donna Sullivan
{"title":"医院环境中MRSA载体快速检测的成本效益和效果分析。","authors":"Gay Henson,&nbsp;Elham Ghonim,&nbsp;Andrea Swiatlo,&nbsp;Shelia King,&nbsp;Kimberly S Moore,&nbsp;S Travis King,&nbsp;Donna Sullivan","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted comparing the polymerase chain reaction assay and traditional microbiological culture as screening tools for the identification of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in patients admitted to the pediatric and surgical intensive care units (PICU and SICU) at a 722 bed academic medical center. In addition, the cost benefits of identification of colonized MRSA patients were determined. The cost-effectiveness analysis employed actual hospital and laboratory costs, not patient costs. The actual cost of the PCR assay was higher than the microbiological culture identification of MRSA ($602.95 versus $364.30 per positive carrier identified). However, this did not include the decreased turn-around time of PCR assays compared to traditional culture techniques. Patient costs were determined indirectly in the cost-benefit analysis of clinical outcome. There was a reduction in MRSA hospital-acquired infection (3.5 MRSA HAI/month without screening versus 0.6/month with screening by PCR). A cost-benefit analysis based on differences in length of stay suggests an associated savings in hospitalization costs: MRSA HAI with 29.5 day median LOS at $63,810 versus MRSA identified on admission with 6 day median LOS at $14,561, a difference of $49,249 per hospitalization. Although this pilot study was small and it is not possible to directly relate the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis due to confounding factors such as patient underlying morbidity and mortality, a reduction of 2.9 MRSA HAI/month associated with PCR screening suggests potential savings in hospitalization costs of $142,822 per month.</p>","PeriodicalId":72611,"journal":{"name":"Clinical laboratory science : journal of the American Society for Medical Technology","volume":"27 1","pages":"13-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-benefit and effectiveness analysis of rapid testing for MRSA carriage in a hospital setting.\",\"authors\":\"Gay Henson,&nbsp;Elham Ghonim,&nbsp;Andrea Swiatlo,&nbsp;Shelia King,&nbsp;Kimberly S Moore,&nbsp;S Travis King,&nbsp;Donna Sullivan\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted comparing the polymerase chain reaction assay and traditional microbiological culture as screening tools for the identification of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in patients admitted to the pediatric and surgical intensive care units (PICU and SICU) at a 722 bed academic medical center. In addition, the cost benefits of identification of colonized MRSA patients were determined. The cost-effectiveness analysis employed actual hospital and laboratory costs, not patient costs. The actual cost of the PCR assay was higher than the microbiological culture identification of MRSA ($602.95 versus $364.30 per positive carrier identified). However, this did not include the decreased turn-around time of PCR assays compared to traditional culture techniques. Patient costs were determined indirectly in the cost-benefit analysis of clinical outcome. There was a reduction in MRSA hospital-acquired infection (3.5 MRSA HAI/month without screening versus 0.6/month with screening by PCR). A cost-benefit analysis based on differences in length of stay suggests an associated savings in hospitalization costs: MRSA HAI with 29.5 day median LOS at $63,810 versus MRSA identified on admission with 6 day median LOS at $14,561, a difference of $49,249 per hospitalization. Although this pilot study was small and it is not possible to directly relate the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis due to confounding factors such as patient underlying morbidity and mortality, a reduction of 2.9 MRSA HAI/month associated with PCR screening suggests potential savings in hospitalization costs of $142,822 per month.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72611,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical laboratory science : journal of the American Society for Medical Technology\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"13-20\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical laboratory science : journal of the American Society for Medical Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical laboratory science : journal of the American Society for Medical Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对一家拥有722张床位的学术医疗中心儿科和外科重症监护病房(PICU和SICU)的患者进行了成本-效果分析,比较了聚合酶链反应法和传统微生物培养作为筛选工具鉴定耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)。此外,还确定了鉴定定殖MRSA患者的成本效益。成本效益分析采用的是实际的医院和实验室成本,而不是患者成本。PCR检测的实际成本高于MRSA微生物培养鉴定(每鉴定阳性携带者602.95美元对364.30美元)。然而,这并不包括与传统培养技术相比,PCR检测的周转时间缩短。患者成本在临床结果的成本-收益分析中间接确定。MRSA医院获得性感染减少(未筛查的MRSA HAI/月为3.5,而PCR筛查的MRSA HAI/月为0.6)。基于住院时间差异的成本-收益分析表明,住院费用的相关节省:MRSA HAI的29.5天中位LOS为63,810美元,而MRSA入院时的6天中位LOS为14,561美元,每次住院的差异为49,249美元。虽然这项初步研究规模较小,由于患者潜在发病率和死亡率等混杂因素,不可能直接将成本效益和成本效益分析联系起来,但PCR筛查后每月MRSA HAI减少2.9,表明每月住院费用可能节省142,822美元。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cost-benefit and effectiveness analysis of rapid testing for MRSA carriage in a hospital setting.

A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted comparing the polymerase chain reaction assay and traditional microbiological culture as screening tools for the identification of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in patients admitted to the pediatric and surgical intensive care units (PICU and SICU) at a 722 bed academic medical center. In addition, the cost benefits of identification of colonized MRSA patients were determined. The cost-effectiveness analysis employed actual hospital and laboratory costs, not patient costs. The actual cost of the PCR assay was higher than the microbiological culture identification of MRSA ($602.95 versus $364.30 per positive carrier identified). However, this did not include the decreased turn-around time of PCR assays compared to traditional culture techniques. Patient costs were determined indirectly in the cost-benefit analysis of clinical outcome. There was a reduction in MRSA hospital-acquired infection (3.5 MRSA HAI/month without screening versus 0.6/month with screening by PCR). A cost-benefit analysis based on differences in length of stay suggests an associated savings in hospitalization costs: MRSA HAI with 29.5 day median LOS at $63,810 versus MRSA identified on admission with 6 day median LOS at $14,561, a difference of $49,249 per hospitalization. Although this pilot study was small and it is not possible to directly relate the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis due to confounding factors such as patient underlying morbidity and mortality, a reduction of 2.9 MRSA HAI/month associated with PCR screening suggests potential savings in hospitalization costs of $142,822 per month.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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