OBJECTIVE: To reduce drug costs attributable to anti-anaerobic cephalosporins - specifically to reduce cefoxitin use in surgical prophylaxis. DESIGN: Before and after intervention cefoxitin use comparison. SETTING: Tertiary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized patients. INTERVENTIONS: Chart review of patients identified through pharmacy records as cefoxitin recipients was carried out to determine which physicians were the principal users of cefoxitin and the purpose for such use. These data were used to direct cost containment strategies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hospital quarterly pharmacy acquisition costs and grams of cefoxitin used. RESULTS: The departments of surgery (49%) and obstetrics/gynecology (37%) were the principal users of cefoxitin, and surgical prophylaxis was found to be the principal indication for use (63%). These departments were invited by the Antibiotic Utilization Subcommittee of the hospital's Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee to draft surgical prophylaxis guidelines in keeping with published recommendations. Such guidelines were written and distributed to medical staff and substituted cefazolin for most forms of prophylaxis, gentamicin/metronidazole for colorectal prophylaxis and cefoxitin only for appendectomies. Over the following 21 months, hospital-wide cefoxitin use fell from 6093 g, $70,076 per quarter, to 1316 g, $11,515 per quarter (partially offset by a 2595 g, $9,131 per quarter increase in cefazolin use). CONCLUSION: As a first step in reducing hospital costs of anti-anaerobic cephalosporins, rationalization of cefoxitin use may be preferable to formulary interchange with alternatives such as ceftizoxime or cefotetan.
OBJECTIVE: To reduce drug costs attributable to anti-anaerobic cephalosporins - specifically to reduce cefoxitin use in surgical prophylaxis. DESIGN: Before and after intervention cefoxitin use comparison. SETTING: Tertiary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized patients. INTERVENTIONS: Chart review of patients identified through pharmacy records as cefoxitin recipients was carried out to determine which physicians were the principal users of cefoxitin and the purpose for such use. These data were used to direct cost containment strategies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hospital quarterly pharmacy acquisition costs and grams of cefoxitin used. RESULTS: The departments of surgery (49%) and obstetrics/gynecology (37%) were the principal users of cefoxitin, and surgical prophylaxis was found to be the principal indication for use (63%). These departments were invited by the Antibiotic Utilization Subcommittee of the hospital's Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee to draft surgical prophylaxis guidelines in keeping with published recommendations. Such guidelines were written and distributed to medical staff and substituted cefazolin for most forms of prophylaxis, gentamicin/metronidazole for colorectal prophylaxis and cefoxitin only for appendectomies. Over the following 21 months, hospital-wide cefoxitin use fell from 6093 g, $70,076 per quarter, to 1316 g, $11,515 per quarter (partially offset by a 2595 g, $9,131 per quarter increase in cefazolin use). CONCLUSION: As a first step in reducing hospital costs of anti-anaerobic cephalosporins, rationalization of cefoxitin use may be preferable to formulary interchange with alternatives such as ceftizoxime or cefotetan.
Authors: S T Lefurgy; V N Malashkevich; J T Aguilan; E Nieves; E C Mundorff; B Biju; M A Noel; R Toro; D Baiwir; K M Papp-Wallace; S C Almo; J-M Frere; G Bou; R A Bonomo Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2015-11-02 Impact factor: 5.191