Melanie D Whittington1, Cathy J Bradley1, Adam J Atherly1, Jonathan D Campbell1, Richard C Lindrooth1. 1. Melanie D. Whittington, Cathy J. Bradley, Adam J. Atherly, and Richard C. Lindrooth are with the Department of Health Systems, Management and Policy, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora. Melanie D. Whittington and Jonathan D. Campbell are with the Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the association of 1 activity of the Prevention and Public Health Fund with hospital bloodstream infections and calculate the return on investment (ROI). METHODS: The activity was funded for 1 year (2013). A difference-in-differences specification evaluated hospital standardized infection ratios (SIRs) before funding allocation (years 2011 and 2012) and after funding allocation (years 2013 and 2014) in the 15 US states that received the funding compared with hospital SIRs in states that did not receive the funding. We estimated the association of the funded public health activity with SIRs for bloodstream infections. We calculated the ROI by dividing cost offsets from infections averted by the amount invested. RESULTS: The funding was associated with a 33% (P < .05) reduction in SIRs and an ROI of $1.10 to $11.20 per $1 invested in the year of funding allocation (2013). In 2014, after the funding stopped, significant reductions were no longer evident. CONCLUSIONS: This activity was associated with a reduction in bloodstream infections large enough to recoup the investment. Public health funding of carefully targeted areas may improve health and reduce health care costs.
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the association of 1 activity of the Prevention and Public Health Fund with hospital bloodstream infections and calculate the return on investment (ROI). METHODS: The activity was funded for 1 year (2013). A difference-in-differences specification evaluated hospital standardized infection ratios (SIRs) before funding allocation (years 2011 and 2012) and after funding allocation (years 2013 and 2014) in the 15 US states that received the funding compared with hospital SIRs in states that did not receive the funding. We estimated the association of the funded public health activity with SIRs for bloodstream infections. We calculated the ROI by dividing cost offsets from infections averted by the amount invested. RESULTS: The funding was associated with a 33% (P < .05) reduction in SIRs and an ROI of $1.10 to $11.20 per $1 invested in the year of funding allocation (2013). In 2014, after the funding stopped, significant reductions were no longer evident. CONCLUSIONS: This activity was associated with a reduction in bloodstream infections large enough to recoup the investment. Public health funding of carefully targeted areas may improve health and reduce health care costs.
Authors: Katherine Ellingson; Kelly McCormick; Ronda Sinkowitz-Cochran; Tiffanee Woodard; John Jernigan; Arjun Srinivasan; Kimberly Rask Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2014-02-13 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Deborah S Yokoe; Leonard A Mermel; Deverick J Anderson; Kathleen M Arias; Helen Burstin; David P Calfee; Susan E Coffin; Erik R Dubberke; Victoria Fraser; Dale N Gerding; Frances A Griffin; Peter Gross; Keith S Kaye; Michael Klompas; Evelyn Lo; Jonas Marschall; Lindsay Nicolle; David A Pegues; Trish M Perl; Kelly Podgorny; Sanjay Saint; Cassandra D Salgado; Robert A Weinstein; Robert Wise; David Classen Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 3.254