Kent K Hu1, David L Veenstra, Benjamin A Lipsky, Sanjay Saint. 1. Northwest Health Services Research and Development Program, Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System, University of Washington, Seattle 98108, USA. kenthu@u.washington.edu <kenthu@u.washington.edu>
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the effect of maximal sterile barriers (MSBs) on reducing central venous catheter (CVC)--related infections. Use of MSBs when placing CVCs may reduce the risk of infections but is more cumbersome, time-consuming, and expensive than other techniques. METHODS: We developed a decision analytic model in which a patient could have a CVC placed with either an MSB or a less stringent technique. We calculated total direct medical costs and the incidences of catheter-related bloodstream infections, catheter colonization, and death. RESULTS: Use of MSBs lowered costs (from 621 dollars to 369 dollars per catheter insertion) and decreased the incidences of catheter-related bloodstream infections (from 5.3% to 2.8%), catheter colonization with local infection (from 5.5% to 2.9%) and death (from 0.8% to 0.4%). MSBs improved patient safety throughout all sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Use of MSBs during CVC insertion likely lowers medical costs and decreases the incidences of catheter colonization, catheter-related bloodstream infections, and death. Cost savings were found over a wide range of clinical and economic assumptions, suggesting that MSBs should be routinely used when CVCs are inserted.
BACKGROUND: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the effect of maximal sterile barriers (MSBs) on reducing central venous catheter (CVC)--related infections. Use of MSBs when placing CVCs may reduce the risk of infections but is more cumbersome, time-consuming, and expensive than other techniques. METHODS: We developed a decision analytic model in which a patient could have a CVC placed with either an MSB or a less stringent technique. We calculated total direct medical costs and the incidences of catheter-related bloodstream infections, catheter colonization, and death. RESULTS: Use of MSBs lowered costs (from 621 dollars to 369 dollars per catheter insertion) and decreased the incidences of catheter-related bloodstream infections (from 5.3% to 2.8%), catheter colonization with local infection (from 5.5% to 2.9%) and death (from 0.8% to 0.4%). MSBs improved patient safety throughout all sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Use of MSBs during CVC insertion likely lowers medical costs and decreases the incidences of catheter colonization, catheter-related bloodstream infections, and death. Cost savings were found over a wide range of clinical and economic assumptions, suggesting that MSBs should be routinely used when CVCs are inserted.
Authors: Corsino Rey; Francisco Alvarez; Victoria De-La-Rua; Andrés Concha; Alberto Medina; Juan-José Díaz; Sergio Menéndez; Marta Los-Arcos; Juan Mayordomo-Colunga Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2011-01-27 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: J Chandra; L Long; N Isham; P K Mukherjee; G DiSciullo; K Appelt; M A Ghannoum Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2018-07-27 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Teryl K Nuckols; Emmett Keeler; Sally C Morton; Laura Anderson; Brian Doyle; Marika Booth; Roberta Shanman; Jonathan Grein; Paul Shekelle Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2016-12-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Thomas J Papadimos; Sandra J Hensely; Joan M Duggan; James P Hofmann; Sadik A Khuder; Marilyn J Borst; John J Fath Journal: Patient Saf Surg Date: 2008-04-30
Authors: Sangtaeck Lim; Gaurav Gangoli; Erica Adams; Robert Hyde; Michael S Broder; Eunice Chang; Sheila R Reddy; Marian H Tarbox; Tanya Bentley; Liza Ovington; Walt Danker Journal: Inquiry Date: 2019 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 1.730