从医院角度看奥马达环素对美国社区获得性细菌性肺炎患者治疗的预算影响

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
American Health and Drug Benefits Pub Date : 2019-02-01
Kenneth LaPensee, Rohit Mistry, Thomas Lodise
{"title":"从医院角度看奥马达环素对美国社区获得性细菌性肺炎患者治疗的预算影响","authors":"Kenneth LaPensee,&nbsp;Rohit Mistry,&nbsp;Thomas Lodise","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) is an acute, lower respiratory bacterial infection. Despite advances in medical care, CABP remains associated with considerable morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs; early empiric treatment is recommended by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and by the American Thoracic Society. Omadacycline is an oral and intravenous (IV) once-daily aminomethylcycline antibiotic that is approved in the United States for the treatment of adult patients with CABP.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To estimate the budget impact of introducing omadacycline as a treatment option among patients with suspected or documented CABP from a US hospital perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A budget impact model was developed in Microsoft Excel<sup>®</sup> 2010. Population, clinical, and cost inputs were based on the available literature, clinical trial data, and real-world evidence databases. Emergency departments and observation units were assumed to be hospital-owned as part of the analyses. Sensitivity analyses assessed the impact of key parameters on the model results, and scenario analyses were explored to analyze the budget impact of reducing length of hospital stay and avoiding hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The introduction of omadacycline as a treatment resulted in a total budget increase of $20,643 over 3 years. This increase was mainly attributed to treatment acquisition costs. In a scenario where the length of hospital stay was reduced by 1 day (under the assumption that an antibiotic with IV and oral formulations can facilitate earlier discharge from inpatient care), the 3-year total budget decreased to $2384; reducing the hospital stay by 2 days resulted in 3-year cost-savings of $15,875. Shifting inpatient care to the outpatient setting with omadacycline resulted in 3-year cumulative cost-savings of $112,843.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This is the first omadacycline budget impact model developed for adult patients with suspected or documented CABP. The model projected a modest budget increase with the introduction of omadacycline, mainly due to treatment acquisition costs.</p>","PeriodicalId":48595,"journal":{"name":"American Health and Drug Benefits","volume":"12 1-Supplement 1","pages":"S1-S12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6442092/pdf/ahdb-12-0S1.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Budget Impact of Omadacycline for the Treatment of Patients with Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia in the United States from the Hospital Perspective.\",\"authors\":\"Kenneth LaPensee,&nbsp;Rohit Mistry,&nbsp;Thomas Lodise\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) is an acute, lower respiratory bacterial infection. Despite advances in medical care, CABP remains associated with considerable morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs; early empiric treatment is recommended by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and by the American Thoracic Society. Omadacycline is an oral and intravenous (IV) once-daily aminomethylcycline antibiotic that is approved in the United States for the treatment of adult patients with CABP.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To estimate the budget impact of introducing omadacycline as a treatment option among patients with suspected or documented CABP from a US hospital perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A budget impact model was developed in Microsoft Excel<sup>®</sup> 2010. Population, clinical, and cost inputs were based on the available literature, clinical trial data, and real-world evidence databases. Emergency departments and observation units were assumed to be hospital-owned as part of the analyses. Sensitivity analyses assessed the impact of key parameters on the model results, and scenario analyses were explored to analyze the budget impact of reducing length of hospital stay and avoiding hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The introduction of omadacycline as a treatment resulted in a total budget increase of $20,643 over 3 years. This increase was mainly attributed to treatment acquisition costs. In a scenario where the length of hospital stay was reduced by 1 day (under the assumption that an antibiotic with IV and oral formulations can facilitate earlier discharge from inpatient care), the 3-year total budget decreased to $2384; reducing the hospital stay by 2 days resulted in 3-year cost-savings of $15,875. Shifting inpatient care to the outpatient setting with omadacycline resulted in 3-year cumulative cost-savings of $112,843.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This is the first omadacycline budget impact model developed for adult patients with suspected or documented CABP. The model projected a modest budget increase with the introduction of omadacycline, mainly due to treatment acquisition costs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48595,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Health and Drug Benefits\",\"volume\":\"12 1-Supplement 1\",\"pages\":\"S1-S12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6442092/pdf/ahdb-12-0S1.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Health and Drug Benefits\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Health and Drug Benefits","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:社区获得性细菌性肺炎(CABP)是一种急性下呼吸道细菌感染。尽管医疗保健取得了进步,但CABP仍然与相当高的发病率、死亡率和医疗费用有关;美国传染病学会和美国胸科学会推荐早期经验性治疗。Omadacycline是一种口服和静脉注射(IV)每日一次的氨甲基环素抗生素,在美国被批准用于治疗成人CABP患者。目的:从美国医院的角度估计引入奥马达环素作为疑似或记录的CABP患者的治疗选择的预算影响。方法:在Microsoft Excel®2010中建立预算影响模型。人口、临床和成本输入基于现有文献、临床试验数据和真实世界证据数据库。作为分析的一部分,假定急诊科和观察科为医院所有。敏感性分析评估了关键参数对模型结果的影响,情景分析探讨了减少住院时间和避免住院对预算的影响。结果:引进奥马达环素作为治疗导致3年内总预算增加20,643美元。这一增加主要归因于获得治疗的费用。在住院时间缩短1天的情况下(假设静脉注射和口服配方的抗生素可以促进住院治疗的早期出院),3年总预算减少到2384美元;住院时间减少2天,3年费用节省15 875美元。将住院病人的护理转移到门诊使用奥马达环素,3年累计节省成本112,843美元。结论:这是第一个为疑似或有记录的CABP的成人患者开发的奥马达环素预算影响模型。该模型预测,随着奥马达环素的引入,预算将适度增加,主要是由于获得治疗的费用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Budget Impact of Omadacycline for the Treatment of Patients with Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia in the United States from the Hospital Perspective.

Budget Impact of Omadacycline for the Treatment of Patients with Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia in the United States from the Hospital Perspective.

Background: Community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) is an acute, lower respiratory bacterial infection. Despite advances in medical care, CABP remains associated with considerable morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs; early empiric treatment is recommended by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and by the American Thoracic Society. Omadacycline is an oral and intravenous (IV) once-daily aminomethylcycline antibiotic that is approved in the United States for the treatment of adult patients with CABP.

Objective: To estimate the budget impact of introducing omadacycline as a treatment option among patients with suspected or documented CABP from a US hospital perspective.

Methods: A budget impact model was developed in Microsoft Excel® 2010. Population, clinical, and cost inputs were based on the available literature, clinical trial data, and real-world evidence databases. Emergency departments and observation units were assumed to be hospital-owned as part of the analyses. Sensitivity analyses assessed the impact of key parameters on the model results, and scenario analyses were explored to analyze the budget impact of reducing length of hospital stay and avoiding hospitalization.

Results: The introduction of omadacycline as a treatment resulted in a total budget increase of $20,643 over 3 years. This increase was mainly attributed to treatment acquisition costs. In a scenario where the length of hospital stay was reduced by 1 day (under the assumption that an antibiotic with IV and oral formulations can facilitate earlier discharge from inpatient care), the 3-year total budget decreased to $2384; reducing the hospital stay by 2 days resulted in 3-year cost-savings of $15,875. Shifting inpatient care to the outpatient setting with omadacycline resulted in 3-year cumulative cost-savings of $112,843.

Conclusion: This is the first omadacycline budget impact model developed for adult patients with suspected or documented CABP. The model projected a modest budget increase with the introduction of omadacycline, mainly due to treatment acquisition costs.

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
American Health and Drug Benefits
American Health and Drug Benefits Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
期刊介绍: AHDB welcomes articles on clinical-, policy-, and business-related topics relevant to the integration of the forces in healthcare that affect the cost and quality of healthcare delivery, improve healthcare quality, and ultimately result in access to care, focusing on health organization structures and processes, health information, health policies, health and behavioral economics, as well as health technologies, products, and patient behaviors relevant to value-based quality of care.
×
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