Literature DB >> 10662480

Cost effectiveness of ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole versus imipenem-cilastatin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections.

D J Walters1, J S Solomkin, J A Paladino.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost effectiveness of sequential intravenous (i.v.) to oral ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole (CIP/MTZ i.v./PO) with that of i.v. ciprofloxacin plus i.v. metronidazole (CIP/MTZ i.v.) and i.v. imipenem-cilastatin (IMI i.v.) in patients with intra-abdominal infections. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients enrolled in a double-blind randomised clinical trial were eligible for inclusion into this cost-effectiveness analysis. Decision analysis was used to characterise the economic outcomes between groups and provide a structure upon which to base the sensitivity analyses. 1996 cost values were used throughout.
SETTING: The economic perspective of the analysis was that of a hospital provider. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND
RESULTS: Among 446 economically evaluable patients, 176 could be switched from i.v. to oral administration. The 51 patients randomised to CIP/MTZ i.v./PO who received active oral therapy had a success rate of 98%, mean duration of therapy of 9.1 days and mean cost of $US7678. There were 125 patients randomized to either CIP/MTZ i.v. or IMI i.v. who received oral placebo while continuing on active i.v. antibacterials; their success rate was 94%, mean duration of therapy was 10.1 days and mean cost was $US8774 (p = 0.029 vs CIP/MTZ i.v./PO). Of the 270 patients who were unable to receive oral administration, 97 received IMI i.v. and had a success rate of 75%, mean duration of therapy of 13.8 days and a mean cost of $US12,418, and 173 received CIP/MTZ i.v. and had a success rate of 77%, mean duration of therapy of 13.4 days and mean cost of $US12,219 (p = 0.26 vs IMI i.v.).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients able to receive oral therapy, sequential i.v. to oral treatment with ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole was cost effective compared with full i.v. courses of ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole or imipenem-cilastatin. In patients unable to receive oral therapy, no difference in mean cost was found between i.v. imipenem-cilastatin or i.v. ciprofloxacin plus i.v. metronidazole.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10662480     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199916050-00011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  50 in total

Review 1.  Guidelines for pharmacoeconomic studies. Recommendations from the panel on cost effectiveness in health and medicine. Panel on cost Effectiveness in Health and Medicine.

Authors:  J E Siegel; G W Torrance; L B Russell; B R Luce; M C Weinstein; M R Gold
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  The decision rules of cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  G Karlsson; M Johannesson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  The role of pharmacoeconomics in disease management. A pharmaceutical benefit management company perspective.

Authors:  N Thomas
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  A clinician's guide to cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  A S Detsky; I G Naglie
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1990-07-15       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Imipenem versus tobramycin--antianaerobe antibiotic therapy in intra-abdominal infections.

Authors:  D Poenaru; M De Santis; N V Christou
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 2.089

6.  Pharmacoeconomics of piperacillin/tazobactam and imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of patients with intra-abdominal infections.

Authors:  S S Jhee; M A Gill; A E Yellin; T V Berne; P N Heseltine; M D Appleman
Journal:  Clin Ther       Date:  1995 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.393

7.  Clinical and economic evaluation of oral ciprofloxacin after an abbreviated course of intravenous antibiotics.

Authors:  J A Paladino; H E Sperry; J M Backes; J A Gelber; D J Serrianne; T J Cumbo; J J Schentag
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1991-11       Impact factor: 4.965

Review 8.  Treatment of intra-abdominal infections.

Authors:  S L Gorbach
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 5.790

9.  Imipenem (N-F-thienamycin) versus netilmicin plus clindamycin. A controlled and randomized comparison in intra-abdominal infections.

Authors:  H R Gonzenbach; H P Simmen; R Amgwerd
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Prospective study comparing imipenem-cilastatin with clindamycin and gentamicin for the treatment of serious surgical infections.

Authors:  A W Hackford; F P Tally; R B Reinhold; M Barza; S L Gorbach
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1988-03
View more
  1 in total

1.  Canadian practice guidelines for surgical intra-abdominal infections.

Authors:  Anthony W Chow; Gerald A Evans; Avery B Nathens; Chad G Ball; Glen Hansen; Godfrey Km Harding; Andrew W Kirkpatrick; Karl Weiss; George G Zhanel
Journal:  Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.471

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.