Costs and resource utilization patterns in surgical site infections: a pre-COVID-19 perspective from France, Germany, Spain, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSIs), mainly caused by Staphylococcus aureus, pose a significant economic burden in Europe, leading to increased hospitalization duration, mortality, and treatment costs, particularly with drug-resistant strains such as meticillin-resistant S. aureus. AIM: To conduct a case-control study on the economic impact of S. aureus SSI in adult surgical patients across high-volume centres in France, Germany, Spain, and the UK, aiming to assess the overall and procedure-specific burden across Europe. METHODS: The SALT study is a multinational, retrospective cohort study with a nested case-control analysis focused on S. aureus SSI in Europe. The study included participants from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK who underwent invasive surgery in 2016 and employed a micro-costing approach to evaluate health economic factors, matching S. aureus SSI cases with controls. FINDINGS: In 2016, among 178,904 surgical patients in five European countries, 764 developed S. aureus SSI. Matching 744 cases to controls, the study revealed that S. aureus SSI cases incurred higher immediate hospitalization costs (€8,810), compared to controls (€6,032). Additionally, S. aureus SSI cases exhibited increased costs for readmissions within the first year post surgery (€7,961.6 versus €5,298.6), with significant differences observed. Factors associated with increased surgery-related costs included the cost of hospitalization immediately after surgery, first intensive care unit (ICU) admission within 12 months, and hospital readmission within 12 months, as identified through multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: The higher rates of hospitalization, ICU admissions, and readmissions among S. aureus SSI cases highlight the severity of these infections and their impact on healthcare costs, emphasizing the potential benefits of evidence-based infection control measures and improved patient care to mitigate the economic burden.

Clinical and economic evaluation of the impact of rapid microbiological diagnostic testing.

UNLABELLED: The clinical value of information provided by the Microbiology Laboratory may be reduced by the time it takes to generate results for healthcare providers. The aim of this study was to measure the clinical and economic impact associated with rapid reporting of microbiological results. METHODS: 574 hospitalized patients with a bacterial clinical infection confirmed by culture were evaluated. 284 hospitalized patients were included in the historical control group (results available the day following the analysis) and 290 in the intervention group (results available the same day of the analysis). The Vitek(®) 2 system (bioMérieux) was used for identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing in both groups. RESULTS: Faster reporting of microbiological results enabled the clinician to optimize the antibiotic treatment sooner (P < 0.001). This reduction in turnaround time (17.6 h) was associated with improved clinical outcome, a significant reduction in the length of hospitalization and the number of microbiological and biochemical tests performed. Intubation requirements were significantly lower in the intervention group. Mortality rates did not differ significantly between the two groups. Costs incurred for patients in the intervention group were significantly lower than those in the control group, including costs for Microbiology Laboratory testing, antibiotic costs, length of hospitalization and other patient care costs. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid microbiological information was associated with quality improvement seen in earlier changes in antibiotic use, an improved clinical outcome and financial benefits.

Clinical and economic impact of rapid reporting of bacterial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility results of the most frequently processed specimen types.

Inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions are associated with an increase in healthcare costs and a decrease in the quality of care. The aim of this study was to measure the clinical and economic impact of rapid microbiological reporting on the specimens most frequently processed by the Microbiology Laboratory. The Vitek® 2 system (bioMérieux) was used for identification and susceptibility testing. Only hospitalized patients with bacterial infections were included. Two groups were established, a historical control group (results available the day following the analysis) and an intervention group (results available the same day of the analysis). Specimens studied and the median length of time from the introduction of the microorganism in the Vitek® 2 until microbiological report were as follows: wound and abscess (control = 23.5 h, intervention = 9.5 h, p < 0.001), blood (control = 23.5 h, intervention = 9.2 h, p < 0.001), and urine (control = 23.4 h, intervention = 9.3 h, p < 0.001). Outcome parameters were hospital stay and mortality rates. Hospital costs were calculated. The mortality rates did not differ significantly between the two groups. Faster reporting of identification and antimicrobial susceptibility results was associated with a significant reduction in hospital stay and in overall costs for those patients from whom wound, abscess, and urine specimens were analyzed. However, the antimicrobial results of blood culture isolates did not lead to significant clinical or financial benefits.