Economic evaluation of treatment for MRSA complicated skin and soft tissue infections in Glasgow hospitals.

In the UK, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-associated skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are predominantly managed in the hospital using intravenous (IV) glycopeptides. We set out to explore the potential for and relative healthcare costs of earlier hospital discharge through switch to oral antibiotic therapy (linezolid or rifampicin and doxycycline) or continuation of IV therapy (teicoplanin) via an outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) service. Over 16 months, 173 patients were retrospectively identified with MRSA SSTI, of whom 82.8 % were treated with IV therapy. Thirty-seven patients were potentially suitable for earlier discharge with outpatient therapy. The model assumed 3 days of inpatient management and a maximum of 14 days of outpatient therapy. For the status quo, where patients received only inpatient care with IV therapy, hospital costs were calculated at £12,316 per patient, with 97 % of costs accounted for by direct bed day costs. The mean total cost savings achievable through OPAT or oral therapy was estimated to be £6,136 and £6,159 per patient treated, respectively. A significant proportion of patients with MRSA SSTI may be suitable for outpatient management with either oral therapy or via OPAT, with the potential for significant reduction in healthcare costs.

Incidence and cost of hospitalizations associated with Staphylococcus aureus skin and soft tissue infections in the United States from 2001 through 2009.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (SA) and its role in skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) accentuated the role of SA-SSTIs in hospitalizations. METHODS: We used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample and Census Bureau data to quantify population-based incidence and associated cost for SA-SSTI hospitalizations. RESULTS: SA-SSTI associated hospitalizations increased 123% from 160,811 to 358,212 between 2001 and 2009, and they represented an increasing share of SA- hospitalizations (39% to 51%). SA-SSTI incidence (per 100,000 people) doubled from 57 in 2001 to 117 in 2009 (p<0.01). A significant increase was observed in all age groups. Adults aged 75+ years and children 0-17 years experienced the lowest (27%) and highest (305%) incidence increase, respectively. However, the oldest age group still had the highest SA-SSTI hospitalization incidence across all study years. Total annual cost of SA-SSTI hospitalizations also increased and peaked in 2008 at $4.84 billion, a 44% increase from 2001. In 2009, the average associated cost of a SA-SSTI hospitalization was $11,622 (SE=$200). CONCLUSION: There has been an increase in the incidence and associated cost of SA-SSTI hospitalizations in U.S.A. between 2001 and 2009, with the highest incidence increase seen in children 0-17 years. However, the greatest burden was still seen in the population over 75 years. By 2009, SSTI diagnoses were present in about half of all SA-hospitalizations.

Using daptomycin in hospitalised patients with cSSTI caused by Staphylococcus aureus has an impact on costs.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to assess the cost impact of daptomycin compared to vancomycin treatment in patients hospitalised for complicated skin and soft-tissue infection (cSSTI) with suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection in the UK. METHODS: A decision model was developed to estimate the costs associated with cSSTI treatment. Data on efficacy, treatment duration and early discharge from published clinical trials were used, with data gaps on standard clinical practice being filled by means of clinician interviews. RESULTS: Total health-care costs per patient were GBP 6,214 and GBP 6,491 for daptomycin and vancomycin, respectively. A sensitivity analysis suggested that modifying the parameters within a reasonable range does not impact on the conclusion that the higher cost of daptomycin is likely to be offset by lower costs of monitoring and hospitalisation. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that daptomycin not only provides an alternative treatment for multiple resistant infections, but may also reduce National Health Service costs.

Minimally invasive drainage of subcutaneous abscesses reduces hospital cost and length of stay.

OBJECTIVE: We compared outcomes among pediatric patients managed with minimally invasive (MI) packing techniques with those managed with traditional packing techniques for drainage of subcutaneous abscesses. METHODS: After institutional review board approval, medical records of children requiring drainage of subcutaneous abscesses between January 2010 and June 2011 were reviewed. Data were collected on patient demographics, abscess location, surgical procedure, microbiology cultures, and hospital length of stay (LOS). The hospital accounting system was queried for direct and indirect costs. We compared LOS and cost data among groups managed with MI versus traditional packing techniques. RESULTS: Incision and drainage was performed on 329 children (57.8% girls, 72% white, mean age of 43 months [range <1 to 218]). Of the total abscesses 198 (60.2%) were located in the groin/buttocks/perineum. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus was identified in 74% of culture specimens. A total of 202 patients (61.4%) underwent packing and 127 (38.6%) underwent MI drainage. MI drainage ranged from 0% (0/110) in January to June 2010 to 34.6% (44/127) in the July to December 2010 transition period and reached 90.2% (83/92) in 2011 (P < 0.001). Median LOS decreased from 2 days (interquartile range 1-2) in the packing-only period to 1 day (interquartile range 1-2) in the predominantly MI period (P < 0.001). Hospital costs decreased with the transition to the MI technique (P < 0.001). MI drainage was associated with a $520 reduction in median direct costs and a $385 reduction in median indirect costs (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Soft tissue infections requiring incision and drainage are common in the pediatric population, with the majority caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Infections requiring drainage most frequently occurred in the diaper area of girls younger than 3 years old. Changing to an MI technique significantly decreased the hospital costs and LOS in our patient population.

MRSA eradication in dermatologic outpatients - theory and practice.

BACKGROUND: The dissemination of methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is an increasing challenge in medical care. Apart from hospital acquired MRSA, there has also been an increase in community acquired and livestock associated MRSA. While the risks of MRSA (e. g. wound infections) and consequences (e. g. rejection of patients) are well known, there are little data on the effectiveness of eradication procedures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 32 patients with proven MRSA colonization were monitored during eradication for the following aspects: (1) localization of MRSA (swabs from hairline, anterior nares, throat, axillae, groins, perineum, and wounds, if present), (2) presence of eradication-impairing factors, (3) length of time needed for eradication, (4) cost of eradication, (5) molecular fingerprint and risk assessment (spa-types). RESULTS: We describe the successful eradication of MRSA in all 32 patients. Most positive nasal swabs were obtained from the anterior nares and the throat and only rarely from the hairline or axillae. The greater the number of positive swabs, the more time was needed for eradication. In most patients (37.5%), eradication with topical antiseptics was successful. The average time for eradication was 12.97 (± 7.6) days. Twelve patients required systemic antibiotic therapy. Treatment costs associated with the use of systemic antibiotics were significantly higher. The most frequent spa types were t032 and t003. CONCLUSIONS: We report successful MRSA eradication in outpatients. Systemic antibiotics are unnecessary in the majority of patients. A combined anti-MRSA strategy for inpatients and outpatients is recommended.

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.

Skin infections due to Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL)-producing S. aureus-Cost effectiveness of outpatient treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI) caused by Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL)-producing strains of Staphylococcus aureus (PVL-SA) are associated with recurrent skin abscesses. Secondary prevention, in conjunction with primary treatment of the infection, focuses on topical decolonization. Topical decolonization is a standard procedure in cases of recurrent PVL-SA skin infections and is recommended in international guidelines. However, this outpatient treatment is often not fully reimbursed by health insurance providers, which may interfere with successful PVL-SA decolonization. AIM: Our goal was to estimate the cost effectiveness of outpatient decolonization of patients with recurrent PVL-SA skin infections. We calculated the average cost of treatment for PVL-SA per outpatient decolonization procedure as well as per in-hospital stay. METHODS: The study was conducted between 2014 and 2018 at a German tertiary care university hospital. The cohort analyzed was obtained from the hospital's microbiology laboratory database. Data on medical costs, DRG-based diagnoses, and ICD-10 patient data was obtained from the hospital's financial controlling department. We calculated the average cost of treatment for patients admitted for treatment of PVL-SA induced skin infections. The cost of outpatient treatment is based on the German regulations of drug prices for prescription drugs. RESULTS: We analyzed a total of n = 466 swabs from n = 411 patients with recurrent skin infections suspected of carrying PVL-SA. PVL-SA was detected in 61.3% of all patients included in the study. Of those isolates, 80.6% were methicillin-susceptible, 19.4% methicillin-resistant. 89.8% of all patients were treated as outpatients. In 73.0% of inpatients colonized with PVL-SA the main diagnosis was SSTI. The median length of stay was 5.5 days for inpatients colonized with PVL-SA whose main diagnosis SSTI; the average cost was €2,283. The estimated costs per decolonization procedure in outpatients ranged from €50-€110, depending on the products used. CONCLUSION: Our data shows that outpatient decolonization offers a highly cost-effective secondary prevention strategy, which may prevent costly inpatient treatments. Therefore, health insurance companies should consider providing coverage of outpatient treatment of recurrent PVL-SA skin and soft tissue infections.

Skin and soft tissue infections in hospitalised patients with diabetes: culture isolates and risk factors associated with mortality, length of stay and cost.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) cause substantial morbidity in persons with diabetes. There are few data on pathogens or risk factors associated with important outcomes in diabetic patients hospitalised with SSTIs. METHODS: Using a clinical research database from CareFusion, we identified 3,030 hospitalised diabetic patients with positive culture isolates and a diagnosis of SSTI in 97 US hospitals between 2003 and 2007. We classified the culture isolates and analysed their association with the anatomic location of infection, mortality, length of stay and hospital costs. RESULTS: The only culture isolate with a significantly increased prevalence was methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA); prevalence for infection of the foot was increased from 11.6 to 21.9% (p < 0.0001) and for non-foot locations from 14.0% to 24.6% (p = 0.006). Patients with non-foot (vs foot) infections were more severely ill at presentation and had higher mortality rates (2.2% vs 1.0%, p < 0.05). Significant independent risk factors associated with higher mortality rates included having a polymicrobial culture with Pseudomonas aeruginosa (OR 3.1), a monomicrobial culture with other gram-negatives (OR 8.9), greater illness severity (OR 1.9) and being transferred from another hospital (OR 5.1). These factors and need for major surgery were also independently associated with longer length of stay and higher costs. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Among diabetic patients hospitalised with SSTI from 2003 to 2007, only MRSA increased in prevalence. Patients with non-foot (vs foot) infections were more severely ill. Independent risk factors for increased mortality rates, length of stay and costs included more severe illness, transfer from another hospital and wound cultures with Pseudomonas or other gram-negatives.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of linezolid vs. vancomycin in treating methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus complicated skin and soft tissue infections using a decision analytic model.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of vancomycin vs. linezolid in complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTIs) with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) using a decision analytic (DA) model. METHODS: A DA model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of four treatment strategies in the treatment of MRSA cSSTIs: linezolid intravenous (i.v.) to oral (LIN), vancomycin i.v. inpatient treatment (VAN-1), vancomycin i.v. switch to oral linezolid (VAN-2) and vancomycin i.v. switch to outpatient vancomycin i.v. (VAN-3). Probabilities were determined from published clinical trials. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the various strategies were the primary outcome. Univariate (one-way) sensitivity analysis and second-order Monte Carlo simulation (using 10,000 trials) were conducted for all parameters used in the model. RESULTS: The DA model predicted that VAN-3 was the most cost-effective strategy from the base-case analysis. Average cost-effectiveness ratio for this strategy was $26,831.42/cure. Univariate sensitivity analysis revealed that the model was sensitive to linezolid duration of inpatient stay and duration of i.v. vancomycin before switching to an oral agent or discharged with outpatient i.v. administration with vancomycin. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that VAN-1 was dominated by LIN, but LIN was only 30% cost-effective compared with VAN-3. Acceptability curve showed that the probability of choosing LIN as a cost-effective strategy compared with VAN-1, VAN-2 and VAN-3 increased as the willingness-to-pay (WTP) increased. CONCLUSION: Alternative vancomycin strategies (VAN-2 and VAN-3) that take advantage of early discharge opportunities were cost-effective compared with LIN. However, LIN's higher efficacy would make it cost-effective for payers with a high WTP threshold.

Cost-effectiveness of linezolid versus vancomycin for hospitalised patients with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections in Germany.

This study used a decision analytic model approach to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of linezolid versus vancomycin in the empirical treatment of complicated skin and soft-tissue infection (cSSTI) due to suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) from the German hospital and health care system perspective. Clinical probabilities were obtained from trial data, resource utilisation and MRSA prevalence rates were obtained through German physician interviews, and costs from published sources were applied to resource units. Outcomes included total cost/patient and cure. The estimated first-line cure rate for linezolid-treated patients was 90.1% versus 85.5% for vancomycin; total cure rates after two lines of treatment were 98.4% and 98.1%, respectively. Average total cost/episode was 8,232 euro for linezolid versus 9,206 euro for vancomycin. The model outcomes were sensitive to changes in length of stay (LOS), isolation days, rate of confirmed MRSA and price of linezolid. Linezolid was expected to result in a shorter intravenous treatment duration and shorter LOS that offset its higher acquisition cost versus vancomycin in cSSTI in Germany.

Reducing MRSA infections in college student athletes: implementation of a prevention program.

An interventional prevention program, Training CAMP Program, was implemented with college football players (n = 98) in a Midwestern NCAA Division II college during the 2008 college football season. The program goal was a 50% reduction in community-acquired Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) cases, as compared to the previous 3 seasons' average number of cases (12.6). Results showed a greater than 75% reduction in CA-MRSA in the target population, with only 3 cases recorded for the entire 2008 college football season. A 1-group pretest-posttest design paired t-test revealed increased knowledge and knowledge retention. Program description, implementation, evaluation, cost-effectiveness, and future recommendations are described.

Cost-effectiveness of linezolid versus vancomycin for hospitalized patients with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections in France.

UNLABELLED: Studies have shown similar clinical cure rates and shorter length of hospitalization when using linezolid compared to vancomycin in patients with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections due to suspected or proven methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). OBJECTIVE: This study had for aim to compare the cost-effectiveness of linezolid versus vancomycin in French healthcare settings. METHOD: A decision-analytic model followed an average patient from the initiation of an empiric treatment until cure, death or second-line treatment failure. A clinical data probability was obtained from clinical trials, resource utilization data (including treatment duration and length of hospitalization) and prevalence of MRSA was obtained from a Delphi panel, and costs from published sources. RESULTS: First-line cure rate for linezolid-treated patients was 90.7% versus 85.5% for vancomycin; the total cure rates after two lines of treatment were 98.5% and 98.0%, respectively. The average total cost was 7,778euro for linezolid versus 8,777euro for vancomycin. The mean estimated length of hospitalization after two lines of treatment was 10.7 days for linezolid versus 13.3 days for vancomycin. The increased effectiveness and reduced cost lead to more frequent prescription. This did not change after one-way sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Linezolid may be considered as a cost-effective treatment for patients with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections suspected to be MRSA related in France.

A comparison of costs and hospital length of stay associated with intravenous/oral linezolid or intravenous vancomycin treatment of complicated skin and soft-tissue infections caused by suspected or confirmed methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in elderly US patients.

OBJECTIVES: This study compared the costs and hospital length of stay (LOS) and duration of intravenous therapy associated with intravenous/oral linezolid or intravenous vancomycin treatment of complicated skin and soft-tissue infections (cSSTIs) caused by suspected or confirmed methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in elderly US patients. METHODS: Data were obtained from elderly (>or=65 years) US patients participating in a multinational randomized trial of hospitalized cSSTI patients treated with linezolid or vancomycin. Costs (hospital and total) from the provider perspective were estimated for intent-to-treat (ITT) patients (ie, all those receiving >or=1 dose) using national 2003 costs (ward, medication, intravenous administration). LOS for inpatient care, duration of intravenous linezolid and vancomycin therapy (ITT and MRSA groups), and cure rates were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 717 enrolled subjects, 163 (23%) were elderly (87 linezolid, 76 vancomycin), with no significant differences in demographic characteristics between the linezolid and vancomycin groups. Mean hospitalization and total costs were lower with linezolid compared with vancomycin (hospitalization: US $4510 vs US $6478, P<0.001; total: US $6009 vs US $7329, P=0.03). Linezolid was associated with a 3.5-day reduction in LOS and a 9.5-day reduction in the duration of intravenous therapy compared with vancomycin in the ITT group (both, P<0.001). Cure rates were comparable between linezolid and vancomycin in both the ITT group (88.7% vs 81.4%, respectively) and the MRSA group (80.0% vs 71.4%). In multivariate analyses of the ITT group, linezolid patients were 57% less likely than vancomycin patients to have a LOS >7 days (odds ratio = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.21-0.87). Chronic renal failure, malnutrition, and a diagnosis of infected ulcer predicted an LOS >7 days. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of data from elderly patients with cSSTI caused by suspected or confirmed MRSA, linezolid treatment was associated with reductions in the costs of care, LOS, and duration of intravenous treatment without affecting the clinical outcomes. Although the use of a subset of patients from a larger trial that did not focus on the elderly can be seen as a study limitation, the elderly represent an important population when evaluating health care resource use and costs.

Daptomycin versus vancomycin for complicated skin and skin structure infections: clinical and economic outcomes.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of daptomycin compared with vancomycin on the clinical and economic outcomes in patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections. DESIGN: Prospective, open-label study. SETTING: Level 1 trauma center in Detroit, Michigan. PATIENTS: Fifty-three adult patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections at risk for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection who were treated with daptomycin and a matched cohort of 212 patients treated with vancomycin. INTERVENTION: Patients in the prospective arm received intravenous daptomycin 4 mg/kg every 24 hours for at least 3 days but not more than 14 days. Historical controls received at least 3 days of vancomycin dosed to achieve trough concentrations of 5-20 microg/ml. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Outcomes evaluated included blinded assessments of clinical resolution, duration of therapy, and costs. The most common diagnoses were cellulitis (31%), abscess (22%), and both cellulitis with abscess (37%). Microbiology differed significantly between groups, with S. aureus found in 27 patients (51%) in the daptomycin group and 167 patients (79%) in the vancomycin group and MRSA in 22 (42%) and 159 (75%), respectively (p<0.001). The proportions of patients with clinical improvement or resolution of their infections on days 3 and 5 were 90% versus 70% and 98% versus 81% in the daptomycin versus vancomycin groups, respectively (p<0.01 for both comparisons), and 100% at the end of therapy in both groups. Among patients with complete resolution of their infections (41 patients [77%] with daptomycin vs 89 patients [42%] with vancomycin, p<0.05), median duration of intravenous therapy was 4 and 7 days, respectively, (p<0.001), and hospital costs were $5027 and $7552 (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving daptomycin achieved more rapid resolution of symptoms and clinical cure and had a decreased duration of inpatient therapy compared with those receiving vancomycin. This study suggests that daptomycin is a cost-effective alternative to vancomycin for complicated skin and skin structure infections.

Use of Oritavancin in Moderate-to-Severe ABSSSI Patients Requiring IV Antibiotics: A U.S. Payer Budget Impact Analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) account for nearly 10% of hospital admissions and 3.4-3.8 million emergency department visits per year in the United States. Analyses of hospital discharge records indicate 74% of ABSSSI admissions involve empiric treatment with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) active antibiotics. Analysis has shown that payer costs could be reduced if moderate-to-severe ABSSSI patients were treated to a greater extent in the observational unit followed by discharge to outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT). Oritavancin is a lipoglycopeptide antibiotic with bactericidal activity against gram-positive bacteria, including MRSA. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the impact on a U.S. payer's budget of using single-dose oritavancin in ABSSSI patients with suspected MRSA involvement who are indicated for intravenous antibiotics. METHODS: A decision analytic model based on current clinical practice was developed to estimate the economic value of decreased hospital resource consumption by using single-dose oritavancin over a 1-year time horizon. Use of antibiotics was informed by an analysis of the Premier Research Database. Demographic and clinical data were derived from a targeted literature review. Emergency department, observation, laboratory, and administration costs used were Medicare National Limitation amounts. Drug costs were 2014 wholesale acquisition costs. RESULTS: For a hypothetical U.S. payer with 1,000,000 members, it is expected that approximately 14,285 members per year will be diagnosed with ABSSSI severe enough to indicate intravenous antibiotics with MRSA activity. Based on this simulation, use of single-dose oritavancin in 26% of these patients was estimated to reduce the number of inpatient admissions, reduce length of stay for patients requiring admission, and reduce the number of days a patient needs to receive daily infusions in the OPAT clinic. The total patient days decreased from 171,125 to 133,435 with a total annual budget impact of -$12,550,000 or -$1.05 per member per month (PMPM). Total inpatient and outpatient costs were reduced by $9,970,000 (19.7%) and $2,580,000 (4.2%), respectively. Inpatient cost savings were derived from a reduction in admissions, length of stay, and lower drug administration burden. Outpatient costs were reduced by lower drug administration burden in the OPAT setting. A sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the model was most sensitive to population estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Use of single-dose oritavancin in moderate-to-severe ABSSSI patients, including those with suspected MRSA, was projected to deliver an estimated cost reduction to U.S. payers of $1.05 PMPM by avoiding hospitalization in appropriate patients and reducing outpatient costs associated with multiday parenteral antibiotic therapy. DISCLOSURES: This work was funded by The Medicines Company. Jensen, Wu, and Cyr are employees of ICON Health Economics, which provides consulting services to the biopharmaceutical industry, including The Medicines Company. Fan and Sulman are employees and shareholders of The Medicines Company. Dufour and Lodise have provided consulting services to The Medicines Company. Nicolau provided model input but did not receive an honorarium for contributions on this project. Nicolau is a speaker for The Medicines Company. Study concept and design were contributed by Jensen and Wu, along with the other authors. Jensen, Wu, Fan, and Sulham collected the data, with assistance from Cyr. Data interpretation was performed by Sulham, Jensen, Wu, and Fan, assisted by Lodise, Nicolau, and Dufour. The manuscript was written by Jensen, Wu, and Sulham, with assistance from Cyr, and revised by Lodise, Nicolau, and Dufour, with assistance from the other authors.

Assessing the economic value of avoiding hospital admissions by shifting the management of gram+ acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections to an outpatient care setting.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate, from a US payer perspective, the cost offsets of treating gram positive acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ABSSSI) with varied hospital length of stay (LOS) followed by outpatient care, as well as the cost implications of avoiding hospital admission. METHODS: Economic drivers of care were estimated using a literature-based economic model incorporating inpatient and outpatient components. The model incorporated equal efficacy, adverse events (AE), resource use, and costs from literature. Costs of once- and twice-daily outpatient infusions to achieve a 14-day treatment were analyzed. Sensitivity analyses were performed. Costs were adjusted to 2015 US$. RESULTS: Total non-drug medical cost for treatment of ABSSSI entirely in the outpatient setting to avoid hospital admission was the lowest among all scenarios and ranged from $4039-$4924. Total non-drug cost for ABSSSI treated in the inpatient setting ranged from $9813 (3 days LOS) to $18,014 (7 days LOS). Inpatient vs outpatient cost breakdown was: 3 days inpatient ($6657)/11 days outpatient ($3156-$3877); 7 days inpatient ($15,017)/7 days outpatient ($2495-$2997). Sensitivity analyses revealed a key outpatient cost driver to be peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) costs (average per patient cost of $873 for placement and $205 for complications). LIMITATIONS: Drug and indirect costs were excluded and resource use was not differentiated by ABSSSI type. It was assumed that successful ABSSSI treatment takes up to 14 days per the product labels, and that once-daily and twice-daily antibiotics have equal efficacy. CONCLUSION: Shifting ABSSSI care to outpatient settings may result in medical cost savings greater than 53%. Typical outpatient scenarios represent 14-37% of total medical cost, with PICC accounting for 28-43% of the outpatient burden. The value of new ABSSSI therapies will be driven by eliminating the need for PICC line, reducing length of stay and the ability to completely avoid a hospital stay.

The evaluation of nosocomial infection during 1-year-period in the burn unit of a training hospital in Istanbul, Turkey.

An analysis of the burned patients, admitted to our eight bed burn unit and treated between 1 January and 31 December 2000, was performed. Prevalence, etiologic agents, length of hospitalization, cost of treatment and mortality rates caused by nosocomial infections (NIs) were studied. The study included 63 patients. Eighteen of these (Group-A) had 24 NI episodes. The most common NI observed was burn-wound infection (58.3%), followed by bacteraemia-sepsis (16.7%). NIs were not detected in the rest at all (Group B). The mean length of hospitalization was 38.5+/-19.7 days in Group A, and 20.3+/-7.6 days in Group B. The mean total burned surface area (TBSA) was 43+/-21 in Group A and 29+/-18 in Group B, while the most important independent risk factor for NI was TBSA in burned patients (OR, 1.08; CI(95), 0.93-1.24). NI prolonged the mean hospital stay to 18 days and increased the cost of treatment by 502 US dollars. The most common bacteria isolated was Pseudomonas aeruginosa (41.7%) and the second was methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA-25.0%). All of the NI-free patients survived, while, five (28.5%) patients with NI died (P<0.01). These findings emphasized the need for careful disinfection and conscientious contact control procedures in areas that serve immunosupressed individuals, such as burned patients.

Antibiotic treatment patterns across Europe in patients with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections due to meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a plea for implementation of early switch and early discharge criteria.

This retrospective observational medical chart review aimed to describe country-specific variations across Europe in real-world meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) complicated skin and soft-tissue infection (cSSTI) treatment patterns, antibiotic stewardship activity, and potential opportunities for early switch (ES) from intravenous (i.v.) to oral formulations and early discharge (ED) from hospital using standardised data collection and criteria and economic implications of these opportunities. Patients were randomly sampled from 12 countries (Austria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain and the UK), aged ≥18 years, with documented MRSA cSSTI, hospitalised between 1 July 2010 and 30 June 2011, discharged alive by 31 July 2011. Of 1502 patients, 1468 received MRSA-targeted therapy. Intravenous-to-oral switch rates ranged from 2.0% to 20.2%, i.v. length of therapy from 10.1 to 18.6 days and hospital length of stay (LoS) from 15.2 to 25.0 days across Europe. Of 341 sites, 82.9% had antibiotic steering committees, 23.7% had i.v.-to-oral switch antibiotic protocols and 12.9% had ED protocols for MRSA cSSTI. ES and ED eligibility ranged from 12.0% (Slovakia) to 56.3% (Greece) and from 10% (Slovakia) to 48.2% (Portugal), respectively. Potential cost savings per ED-eligible patient ranged from €414 (Slovakia) to €2703 (France). MRSA cSSTI treatment patterns varied widely across countries, but further reductions in i.v. therapy, hospital LoS and associated costs could be realised. These data provide insight into clinical practice patterns across diverse European healthcare systems and identify potential opportunities for local clinicians and policy-makers to improve clinical care and cost-effectiveness of this therapeutic area.