A Microcost Analysis of the Use of Personal Protective Equipment During and Before the COVID-19 Pandemic From a Hospital Perspective

IF 1.4 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Value in health regional issues Pub Date : 2024-04-25 DOI:10.1016/j.vhri.2024.01.005
Mariana Andrades Fiorini Monteiro Novo MS , Lukas Fernando De Oliveira Silva MD , Daniela Fernanda dos Santos Alves PhD , Patrick Alexander Wachholz MD, PhD , Vania dos Santos Nunes-Nogueira MD, PhD
{"title":"A Microcost Analysis of the Use of Personal Protective Equipment During and Before the COVID-19 Pandemic From a Hospital Perspective","authors":"Mariana Andrades Fiorini Monteiro Novo MS ,&nbsp;Lukas Fernando De Oliveira Silva MD ,&nbsp;Daniela Fernanda dos Santos Alves PhD ,&nbsp;Patrick Alexander Wachholz MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Vania dos Santos Nunes-Nogueira MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.vhri.2024.01.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To calculate the direct cost of personal protective equipment (PPE) used during the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of a Brazilian tertiary public hospital.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We evaluated the cost of PPE during the pandemic to the cost before (2021 vs 2019, respectively) using the microcosting method. Cost estimates were converted into US dollars in 2023, taking inflation into account and using purchasing power parity conversion rates. Our expenses included gloves, disposable gowns, head coverings, masks, N95 respirators, and eye protection. The number of PPE used was determined by the hospital’s usual protocol, the total number of hospitalized patients, and the number of days of hospitalization. We used the following variables for uncertainty analysis: PPE adherence, an interquartile range of median length of hospitalization, and variance in the cost of each PPE.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In 2021, 26 618 individuals were hospitalized compared with 31 948 in 2019. The median length of stay was 6 and 4 days, respectively. The total and per-patient direct cost of PPE were projected to be 2 939 935.47 US dollar (USD) and 110.45 USD, respectively, during the pandemic, and 1 570 124.08 USD and 49.15 USD, respectively, before the pandemic. The individual cost of PPE was the most influential cost variable.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>According to the hospital’s perspective, the total estimated direct cost of PPE during the COVID-19 pandemic was nearly twice as high as the previous year. This difference might be explained by the 3-fold increase in PPE in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 compared with patients without isolation precautions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":23497,"journal":{"name":"Value in health regional issues","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in health regional issues","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212109924000141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"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

Abstract

Objectives

To calculate the direct cost of personal protective equipment (PPE) used during the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of a Brazilian tertiary public hospital.

Methods

We evaluated the cost of PPE during the pandemic to the cost before (2021 vs 2019, respectively) using the microcosting method. Cost estimates were converted into US dollars in 2023, taking inflation into account and using purchasing power parity conversion rates. Our expenses included gloves, disposable gowns, head coverings, masks, N95 respirators, and eye protection. The number of PPE used was determined by the hospital’s usual protocol, the total number of hospitalized patients, and the number of days of hospitalization. We used the following variables for uncertainty analysis: PPE adherence, an interquartile range of median length of hospitalization, and variance in the cost of each PPE.

Results

In 2021, 26 618 individuals were hospitalized compared with 31 948 in 2019. The median length of stay was 6 and 4 days, respectively. The total and per-patient direct cost of PPE were projected to be 2 939 935.47 US dollar (USD) and 110.45 USD, respectively, during the pandemic, and 1 570 124.08 USD and 49.15 USD, respectively, before the pandemic. The individual cost of PPE was the most influential cost variable.

Conclusions

According to the hospital’s perspective, the total estimated direct cost of PPE during the COVID-19 pandemic was nearly twice as high as the previous year. This difference might be explained by the 3-fold increase in PPE in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 compared with patients without isolation precautions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从医院角度对 COVID-19 大流行期间和之前个人防护设备使用情况的微观成本分析
目标从巴西一家三级公立医院的角度计算 COVID-19 大流行期间使用的个人防护设备 (PPE) 的直接成本。方法我们使用微观成本法评估了大流行期间与之前(分别为 2021 年与 2019 年)的个人防护设备成本。考虑到通货膨胀和购买力平价换算率,成本估算值被换算成 2023 年的美元。我们的支出包括手套、一次性工作服、头罩、口罩、N95 呼吸器和护眼设备。个人防护设备的使用数量由医院的常规方案、住院患者总数和住院天数决定。我们使用以下变量进行不确定性分析:结果 2021 年有 26 618 人住院,而 2019 年为 31 948 人。住院时间中位数分别为 6 天和 4 天。预计在大流行期间,PPE 的总成本和每位患者的直接成本分别为 2 939 935.47 美元和 110.45 美元,而在大流行之前分别为 1 570 124.08 美元和 49.15 美元。结论从医院的角度来看,COVID-19 大流行期间个人防护设备的估计直接成本总额几乎是前一年的两倍。出现这种差异的原因可能是,与未采取隔离预防措施的患者相比,治疗 COVID-19 患者的个人防护设备费用增加了 3 倍。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Value in health regional issues
Value in health regional issues Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
127
期刊最新文献
Understanding What Matters: Stakeholder Views on Decision Criteria for Cancer Drug Selection in the Public Sector in Malaysia. Postpartum Screening for Type 2 Diabetes in Women With a History of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Singapore Cost-Utility Analysis of Dose-Dense Methotrexate, Vinblastine, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin Chemotherapy Regimen in Comparison With Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Chemotherapy Regimen in the Treatment of Patients With Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer in Iran. Editorial Board Table of Contents
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1