Cost of nosocomial infections: analysis of 512 digestive surgery patients

Costs of hospital-acquired infection and transferability of the estimates: a systematic review

Hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) present a substantial problem for healthcare providers, with a relatively high frequency of occurrence and considerable damage caused. There has been an increase in the number of cost-effectiveness and cost-savings analyses of HAI control measures, and the quantification of the cost of HAI (COHAI) is necessary for such calculations. While recent guidelines allow researchers to utilize COHAI estimates from existing published literature when evaluating the economic impact of HAI control measures, it has been observed that the results of economic evaluations may not be directly applied to other jurisdictions due to differences in the context and circumstances in which the original results were produced. The aims of this study were to conduct a systematic review of published studies that have produced COHAI estimates from 1980 to 2006 and to evaluate the quality of these estimates from the perspective of transferability. From a total of 89 publications, only eight papers (9.0%) had a high level of transferability in which all components of costs were described, data for costs in each component were reported, and unit costs were estimated with actual costing. We also did not observe a higher citation level for studies with high levels of transferability. We feel that, in order to ensure an appropriate contribution to the infection control program decision-making process, it is essential for researchers who estimate COHAI, analysts who use COHAI estimates for decision-making, as well as relevant journal reviewers and editors to recognize the importance of a transferability paradigm.

Cost of antimicrobial treatment for nosocomial infections based on a French prevalence survey

An estimate of the antibiotic cost of nosocomial infections (NI) was made in a university hospital group based on data collected in adult inpatients enrolled in the French national prevalence survey in 1996. Among the 6839 study patients, 636 (9.3%) presented with at least one NI, of these, data on antimicrobial treatment were available for 480. The overall daily antibiotic cost was estimated between FF 49,439 and 103,526, resulting in FF 103 to 216 per infected patient. The most expensive antibiotic treatment was prescribed in intensive care patients, for pneumonia for device-related NI, or for multi-resistant bacterial infections. Non-documented NI represented about 20% of the overall antibiotic cost. Beta-lactam antibiotics, especially third generation cephalosporins, and parenteral fluoroquinolones were the most expensive antimicrobial drugs. The cost of antibiotic treatment for NI represents a significant part of hospital expenditure that should be reduced by better control of highly expensive prescriptions.

Estimated costs of postoperative wound infections. A case-control study of marginal hospital and social security costs

A cohort of 4515 surgical patients in ten selected intervention groups was followed. Three hundred and seventeen developed postoperative wound infections, and 291 of these cases were matched 1:1 to controls by operation, sex and age. In comparison to the controls the cases stayed longer in hospital after the intervention and had more contact after discharge with the social security system. Using data from a national sentinel reference database of the incidence of postoperative wound infections, and using national activity data, we established an empirical cost model based on the estimated marginal costs of hospital resources and social sick pay. It showed that the hospital resources spent on the ten groups, which represent half of the postoperative wound infections in Denmark, amounted to approximately 0.5% of the annual national hospital budget. This stratified model creates a better basis for selecting groups of operations which need priority in terms of preventive measures.

Barriers to care

In elevating cost containment to a first principle, the current political debate about health policy in the U.S. and Canada has lost sight of what should be its primary concern: the health status of the population. The two need not be incompatible. Many current medical procedures are of uncertain value for health and entail sizable costs. The application of the knowledge obtained through randomized clinical trials to the practice of medicine can improve public health and at the same time save money for needed health purposes. Technology has come to dominate medical vision and has created conceptual barriers to responsive medical care. Doctors must attend to the illness experience of the patient as well as disease in organs and tissues. The limits of the biomedical model in psychiatry are illustrated by means of a hypothetical instrument: the PET/NMR cephaloscope. Clinical experience in psychiatry makes it abundantly clear that family and cultural environment are decisive determinants of functional status, even in disease conditions with a major organic component.