Cost-effectiveness of linezolid in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus skin and skin structure infections.

Linezolid is a novel oxazolidinone antibacterial agent with a broad clinical application, especially in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus skin and soft-tissue infections and skin and skin-structure infections. Pharmacoeconomic advantages include decreased hospital duration, reduction in intravenous antibiotic use and early discharge opportunities that contribute to an overall reduction in healthcare resources. Linezolid's oral formulation has a pharmacokinetic profile that is similar to its intravenous formulation, which creates opportunities for early discharge not available to comparators like vancomycin and daptomycin. Both vancomycin and daptomycin require intravenous therapy, which compounds the resources required in treating methicillin-resistant S. aureus skin and soft tissue/skin and skin structure infections. Pharmacoeconomic studies have demonstrated an overall reduction in total direct costs to the payer in favor of linezolid over its comparators. Its overall reduction in healthcare utilization makes it an appropriate alternative to the standard therapy, vancomycin.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of linezolid, daptomycin, and vancomycin in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: complicated skin and skin structure infection using Bayesian methods for evidence synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) complicated skin and skin structure infection (cSSSI) is a prominent infection encountered in hospital and outpatient settings that is associated with high resource use for the health-care system. OBJECTIVE: A decision analytic (DA) model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of linezolid, daptomycin, and vancomycin in MRSA cSSSI. METHODS: Bayesian methods for evidence synthesis were used to generate efficacy and safety parameters for a DA model using published clinical trials. CEA was done from the US health-care perspective. Efficacy was defined as a successfully treated patient at the test of cure without any adverse reaction. Primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio between linezolid and vancomycin, daptomycin and vancomycin, and linezolid and daptomycin in MRSA cSSSI. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model. RESULTS: The total direct costs of linezolid, daptomycin, and vancomycin were $18,057, $20,698, and $23,671, respectively. The cost-effectiveness ratios for linezolid, daptomycin, and vancomycin were $37,604, $44,086, and $52,663 per successfully treated patient, respectively. Linezolid and daptomycin were dominant strategies compared to vancomycin. However, linezolid was dominant when compared to daptomycin. The model was sensitive to the duration of daptomycin and linezolid treatment. CONCLUSION: Linezolid and daptomycin are potentially cost-effective based on the assumptions of the DA model; however, linezolid appears to be more cost-effective compared to daptomycin and vancomycin for MRSA cSSSIs.

Assessment of patient communication skills during OSCE: examining effectiveness of a training program in minimizing inter-grader variability.

OBJECTIVE: To assess effectiveness of a training program in reducing inter-grader variability in grading communication skills during an objective structured clinical exam (OSCE). METHODS: Global communication (GC) skills are assessed by standardized participants (SP) and faculty during each OSCE using a 6 item rubric. Despite criteria delineated in the GC rubric, inter-grader variability was observed. During 2008-2009 academic year, a training program was implemented before each OSCE to achieve more consistent interpretation and grading in GC skills. GC grades between SP and faculty for 2nd and 3rd level student OSCEs during 2008-2009 (post-training) were compared to 2007-2008 (pre-training). Data was analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA. RESULTS: 274 and 281 students participated in OSCEs during 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 academic years, respectively. Training significantly (P<.001) decreased grader variability between SPs and faculty. There was a greater mean difference between faculty vs. SP before training (faculty 14.68, SP 15.87) compared to after training (faculty 13.51, SP 13.78). Mean GC scores for both faculty and SPs also decreased significantly after training. CONCLUSION AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: A training program may be necessary to reduce inter-rater variability in assessment of OSCE communication skills if it is to be truly helpful to student pharmacists learning to counsel patients.