Literature DB >> 9182120

Impact of glycopeptide therapy after hospital discharge on inpatient costs: a comparison of teicoplanin and vancomycin.

P G Davey1, R South, M Malek.   

Abstract

Data were collected prospectively from 59 patients receiving vancomycin and 20 patients receiving teicoplanin. The mean daily drug cost was 52.40 pounds for teicoplanin and 31.13 pounds for vancomycin; the 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) for the difference in mean drug costs varied between 14.40 pounds and 28.10 pounds in favour of vancomycin. Use of a loading dose of teicoplanin significantly increased mean daily drug costs if the duration of treatment was less than 10 days. Costs of preparation, administration and monitoring were consistently higher for vancomycin than for teicoplanin and inclusion of these costs reduced the difference in mean daily costs to 13.01 pounds (95% CI 6.10 to 19.90 pounds). In Dundee 11 of 20 patients who received teicoplanin had received some of their treatment after discharge from the hospital and a survey of UK hospitals confirmed that teicoplanin treatment after discharge is being used in a wide range of conditions. The median proportion of teicoplanin treatment in Dundee given after discharge was 28.4% for each patient who received the drug: the median proportion of non-inpatient therapy was 50% per patient of those who received any teicoplanin treatment after discharge. Assuming that teicoplanin costs 20 pounds per day more than vancomycin, use of teicoplanin implies an investment of 70.42 pounds to gain one hospital day through earlier discharge of patients receiving teicoplanin.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 9182120     DOI: 10.1093/jac/37.3.623

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother        ISSN: 0305-7453            Impact factor:   5.790


  5 in total

1.  Vancomycin vs teicoplanin in the treatment of Gram-positive infections: a pharmacoeconomic analysis in a Turkish University Hospital.

Authors:  Aylin Acar Sancar; Selen Yegenoglu; Robin de Vries; Maarten J Postma; Nimet Simsek; Petros Pechlivanoglou; Serhat Unal
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  2008-09-21

2.  Trends in orthopaedic antimicrobial prophylaxis in the UK between 2005 and 2011.

Authors:  R S Aujla; D J Bryson; A Gulihar; G J Taylor
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 1.891

3.  Management of serious staphylococcal infections in the outpatient setting.

Authors:  W Graninger; E Presterl; C Wenisch; E Schwameis; S Breyer; T Vukovich
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 9.546

4.  Intravenous antimicrobial therapy in the community: underused, inadequately resourced, or irrelevant to health care in Britain?

Authors:  D Nathwani; P Davey
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-12-14

5.  Clinical practice and costs of treating catheter-related infections with teicoplanin or vancomycin.

Authors:  Steven Simoens; Nik De Corte; Gert Laekeman
Journal:  Pharm Pract (Granada)       Date:  2006-04
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.