IMI/CIL/REL与CMS+IMI相比,用于治疗对羧酸不敏感的革拉姆-阴性细菌感染的成本效益。

IF 0.4 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.33393/grhta.2023.2488
Martina Paoletti, Andrea Marcellusi, Joe Yang, Francesco Saverio Mennini
{"title":"IMI/CIL/REL与CMS+IMI相比,用于治疗对羧酸不敏感的革拉姆-阴性细菌感染的成本效益。","authors":"Martina Paoletti, Andrea Marcellusi, Joe Yang, Francesco Saverio Mennini","doi":"10.33393/grhta.2023.2488","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cost-effectiveness of IMI/CIL/REL for the treatment of carbapenem non-susceptible Gram-negative bacterial infections Objective: The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam compared to colistin-imipenem in the treatment of hospitalized patients with Gram-negative bacterial infections caused by imipenem-resistant pathogens. The perspective was both that of the National Health Service (NHS) and the social one. Methodology: A mixed model was developed to simulate a cohort of patients capable of highlighting the impacts of the disease on the quality of life and the absorption of economic resources of the patients in analysis. Modelled patients were those with hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP), complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) or complicated urinal tract infection (cUTI) caused by carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative (GN) pathogens. The model begins with a short-term decision tree describing possible treatment routes and outcomes for patients during the hospitalization period. Patients who are healed in the decision tree enter the long-term Markov model, designed to capture the follow-up costs and health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients healed over their lifetime. Results: The analysis, conducted on a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 patients, highlights how the use of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam is advantageous both in terms of diagnosis and treatment in the short term and in terms of cost-effectiveness. In fact, it is dominant compared to colistin-imipenem both in the NHS and in the social perspective since, compared to an average saving of € 2,800.15 and € 3,174.63 respectively, it would generate an increase of 4.76 years of life and of 4.12 QALYs per patient.","PeriodicalId":12627,"journal":{"name":"Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0e/55/grhta-10-18.PMC10105322.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Costo-efficacia di IMI/CIL/REL rispetto a CMS+IMI per il trattamento di infezioni batteriche Gram-negative non sensibili ai carbapenemi.\",\"authors\":\"Martina Paoletti, Andrea Marcellusi, Joe Yang, Francesco Saverio Mennini\",\"doi\":\"10.33393/grhta.2023.2488\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Cost-effectiveness of IMI/CIL/REL for the treatment of carbapenem non-susceptible Gram-negative bacterial infections Objective: The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam compared to colistin-imipenem in the treatment of hospitalized patients with Gram-negative bacterial infections caused by imipenem-resistant pathogens. The perspective was both that of the National Health Service (NHS) and the social one. Methodology: A mixed model was developed to simulate a cohort of patients capable of highlighting the impacts of the disease on the quality of life and the absorption of economic resources of the patients in analysis. Modelled patients were those with hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP), complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) or complicated urinal tract infection (cUTI) caused by carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative (GN) pathogens. The model begins with a short-term decision tree describing possible treatment routes and outcomes for patients during the hospitalization period. Patients who are healed in the decision tree enter the long-term Markov model, designed to capture the follow-up costs and health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients healed over their lifetime. Results: The analysis, conducted on a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 patients, highlights how the use of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam is advantageous both in terms of diagnosis and treatment in the short term and in terms of cost-effectiveness. In fact, it is dominant compared to colistin-imipenem both in the NHS and in the social perspective since, compared to an average saving of € 2,800.15 and € 3,174.63 respectively, it would generate an increase of 4.76 years of life and of 4.12 QALYs per patient.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12627,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0e/55/grhta-10-18.PMC10105322.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33393/grhta.2023.2488\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33393/grhta.2023.2488","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Costo-efficacia di IMI/CIL/REL rispetto a CMS+IMI per il trattamento di infezioni batteriche Gram-negative non sensibili ai carbapenemi.
Cost-effectiveness of IMI/CIL/REL for the treatment of carbapenem non-susceptible Gram-negative bacterial infections Objective: The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam compared to colistin-imipenem in the treatment of hospitalized patients with Gram-negative bacterial infections caused by imipenem-resistant pathogens. The perspective was both that of the National Health Service (NHS) and the social one. Methodology: A mixed model was developed to simulate a cohort of patients capable of highlighting the impacts of the disease on the quality of life and the absorption of economic resources of the patients in analysis. Modelled patients were those with hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP), complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) or complicated urinal tract infection (cUTI) caused by carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative (GN) pathogens. The model begins with a short-term decision tree describing possible treatment routes and outcomes for patients during the hospitalization period. Patients who are healed in the decision tree enter the long-term Markov model, designed to capture the follow-up costs and health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients healed over their lifetime. Results: The analysis, conducted on a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 patients, highlights how the use of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam is advantageous both in terms of diagnosis and treatment in the short term and in terms of cost-effectiveness. In fact, it is dominant compared to colistin-imipenem both in the NHS and in the social perspective since, compared to an average saving of € 2,800.15 and € 3,174.63 respectively, it would generate an increase of 4.76 years of life and of 4.12 QALYs per patient.
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
Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment
Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
20.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment (GRHTA) is a peer-reviewed, open access journal which aims to promote health technology assessment and economic evaluation, enabling choices among alternative therapeutical paths or procedures with different clinical and economic outcomes. GRHTA is a unique journal having three different editorial boards who focus on their respective geographical expertise.
期刊最新文献
Il burden economico e sociale della porpora trombotica trombocitopenica congenita (cTTP) in Italia. Drug utilization and medication adherence for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: an Italian study. Analisi di impatto sul budget sanitario italiano di roxadustat per il trattamento dell’anemia da malattia renale cronica. Place in therapy of dalbavancin to treat Gram-positive infections in antimicrobial resistance era: an overview. The efficacy of dalbavancin and impact on hospitalization and treatment costs in patients with ABSSSI.
×
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