Julie V Robotham1, Sarah R Deeny2, Chris Fuller3, Susan Hopkins4, Barry Cookson5, Sheldon Stone6. 1. Modelling and Economics Unit, Public Health England, London, UK. Electronic address: julie.robotham@phe.gov.uk. 2. Modelling and Economics Unit, Public Health England, London, UK. 3. Department of Infection and Population Health, Farr Institute, University College London, UK. 4. Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. 5. Division of lnfection and lmmunity, University College London, UK. 6. Department of Medicine, Royal Free Campus, University College London Medical School, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In December, 2010, National Health Service (NHS) England introduced national mandatory screening of all admissions for meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). We aimed to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this policy, from a regional or national health-care decision makers' perspective, compared with alternative screening strategies. METHODS: We used an individual-based dynamic transmission model parameterised with national MRSA audit data to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of admission screening of patients in English NHS hospitals compared with five alternative strategies (including no screening, checklist-activated screening, and high-risk specialty-based screening), accompanied by patient isolation and decolonisation, over a 5 year time horizon. We evaluated strategies for different NHS hospital types (acute, teaching, and specialist), MRSA prevalence, and transmission potentials using probabilistic sensitivity analyses. FINDINGS: Compared with no screening, mean cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of screening all admissions was £89,000-148,000 (range £68,000-222,000), and this strategy was consistently more costly and less effective than alternatives for all hospital types. At a £30,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold and current prevalence, only the no-screening strategy was cost effective. The next best strategies were, in acute and teaching hospitals, targeting of high-risk specialty admissions (30-40% chance of cost-effectiveness; mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratios [ICERs] £45,200 [range £35,300-61,400] and £48,000/QALY [£34,600-74,800], respectively) and, in specialist hospitals, screening these patients plus risk-factor-based screening of low-risk specialties (a roughly 20% chance of cost-effectiveness; mean ICER £62,600/QALY [£48,000-89,400]). As prevalence and transmission increased, targeting of high-risk specialties became the optimum strategy at the NHS willingness-to-pay threshold (£30,000/QALY). Switching from screening all admissions to only high-risk specialty admissions resulted in a mean reduction in total costs per year (not considering uncertainty) of £2·7 million per acute hospital, £2·9 million per teaching, and £474,000 per specialist hospital for a minimum rise in infections (about one infection per year per hospital). INTERPRETATION: Our results show that screening all admissions for MRSA is unlikely to be cost effective in England at the current NHS willingness-to-pay threshold, and our findings informed modified guidance to NHS England in 2014. Screening admissions to high-risk specialties is likely to represent better resource use in terms of cost per QALY gained. FUNDING: UK Department of Health.
BACKGROUND: In December, 2010, National Health Service (NHS) England introduced national mandatory screening of all admissions for meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). We aimed to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this policy, from a regional or national health-care decision makers' perspective, compared with alternative screening strategies. METHODS: We used an individual-based dynamic transmission model parameterised with national MRSA audit data to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of admission screening of patients in English NHS hospitals compared with five alternative strategies (including no screening, checklist-activated screening, and high-risk specialty-based screening), accompanied by patient isolation and decolonisation, over a 5 year time horizon. We evaluated strategies for different NHS hospital types (acute, teaching, and specialist), MRSA prevalence, and transmission potentials using probabilistic sensitivity analyses. FINDINGS: Compared with no screening, mean cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of screening all admissions was £89,000-148,000 (range £68,000-222,000), and this strategy was consistently more costly and less effective than alternatives for all hospital types. At a £30,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold and current prevalence, only the no-screening strategy was cost effective. The next best strategies were, in acute and teaching hospitals, targeting of high-risk specialty admissions (30-40% chance of cost-effectiveness; mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratios [ICERs] £45,200 [range £35,300-61,400] and £48,000/QALY [£34,600-74,800], respectively) and, in specialist hospitals, screening these patients plus risk-factor-based screening of low-risk specialties (a roughly 20% chance of cost-effectiveness; mean ICER £62,600/QALY [£48,000-89,400]). As prevalence and transmission increased, targeting of high-risk specialties became the optimum strategy at the NHS willingness-to-pay threshold (£30,000/QALY). Switching from screening all admissions to only high-risk specialty admissions resulted in a mean reduction in total costs per year (not considering uncertainty) of £2·7 million per acute hospital, £2·9 million per teaching, and £474,000 per specialist hospital for a minimum rise in infections (about one infection per year per hospital). INTERPRETATION: Our results show that screening all admissions for MRSA is unlikely to be cost effective in England at the current NHS willingness-to-pay threshold, and our findings informed modified guidance to NHS England in 2014. Screening admissions to high-risk specialties is likely to represent better resource use in terms of cost per QALY gained. FUNDING: UK Department of Health.
Authors: Maria Heckel; Walter Geißdörfer; Franziska A Herbst; Stephanie Stiel; Christoph Ostgathe; Christian Bogdan Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-12-11 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Mark I Garvey; Martyn A C Wilkinson; Craig W Bradley; Kerry L Holden; Elisabeth Holden Journal: Antimicrob Resist Infect Control Date: 2018-12-19 Impact factor: 4.887