Direct cost of procedures for phlebitis treatment in an Inpatient Unit. / Custo direto dos procedimentos para o tratamento do evento adverso flebite em Unidade de Internação Clínica.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the average direct cost of the procedures performed for phlebitis treatment in patients in an Inpatient Unit and estimate the costs of the procedures performed to treat phlebitis in this unit. METHOD: A quantitative, exploratory-descriptive, single-case study. Initially, records of the procedures performed for phlebitis management were identified. Then, the cost was calculated by multiplying the execution time (timed using a chronometer) spent by nursing technicians by the unit cost of direct labor, added to the cost of materials in 2017. RESULTS: 107 phlebitis referring to 96 patients were reported. To treat the different grades of phlebitis, three procedures were carried out "application of ointment of chamomile flower extract"; "Compress application"; "Peripheral venous access installation". "Peripheral venous access installation with Íntima® catheter" corresponded to the most expensive procedure (US$ 8.90-SD=0.06). Considering the record of the execution of 656 (100%) procedures, the total average direct cost estimate corresponded to US$ 866.18/year. CONCLUSION: Knowledge about the costs of procedures can support decision making that increase allocation efficiency of consumed resources.

In-line filtration reduced phlebitis associated with peripheral venous cannulation: Focus on cost-effectiveness and patients' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: In a previous trial, in-line filtration significantly prevented postoperative phlebitis associated with short peripheral venous cannulation. This study aims to describe the cost-effectiveness of in-line filtration in reducing phlebitis and examine patients' perception of in-hospital vascular access management with and without in-line filtration. METHODS: We analysed costs associated with in-line filtration: these data were prospectively recorded during the previous trial. Furthermore, we performed a follow-up for all the 268 patients enrolled in this trial. Among these, 213 patients responded and completed 6 months after hospital discharge questionnaires evaluating the perception of and satisfaction with the management of their vascular access. RESULTS: In-line filtration group required 95.60€ more than the no-filtration group (a mean of € 0.71/patient). In terms of satisfaction with the perioperative management of their short peripheral venous cannulation, 110 (82%) and 103 (76.9%) patients, respectively, for in-line filtration and control group, completed this survey. Within in-line filtration group, 97.3% of patients were satisfied/strongly satisfied; if compared with previous experiences on short peripheral venous cannulation, 11% of them recognised in-line filtration as a relevant causative factor in determining their satisfaction. Among patients within the control group, 93.2% were satisfied/strongly satisfied, although up to 30% of them had experienced postoperative phlebitis. At the qualitative interview, they recognised no difference than previous experiences on short peripheral venous cannulation, and mentioned postoperative phlebitis as a common event that 'normally occurs' during a hospital stay. CONCLUSION: In-line filtration is cost-effective in preventing postoperative phlebitis, and it seems to contribute to increasing patient satisfaction and reducing short peripheral venous cannulation-related discomfort.

Custo direto dos procedimentos para o tratamento do evento adverso flebite em Unidade de Internação Clínica / Costo directo de los procedimientos para el tratamiento del evento adverso de flebitis en una Unidad de Hospitalización Clínica / Direct cost of procedures for phlebitis treatment in an Inpatient Unit

RESUMO Objetivo: Identificar o custo direto médio dos procedimentos realizados para o tratamento do evento adverso flebite em pacientes de uma Unidade de Internação Clínica e estimar o custo dos procedimentos realizados para o tratamento das flebites nesta unidade. Método: Pesquisa quantitativa, exploratório-descritiva, do tipo estudo de caso único. Inicialmente, identificaram-se os registros dos procedimentos realizados para o manejo das flebites em 2017. Em seguida, o custo foi calculado multiplicando o tempo (cronometrado) despendido por técnicos de enfermagem pelo custo unitário da mão de obra direta, somando-o ao custo dos materiais. Resultados: Foram notificadas 107 flebites referentes a 96 pacientes. No tratamento dos diferentes graus de flebite, realizaram-se três procedimentos "aplicação de pomada de extrato de flor de camomila"; "aplicação de compressas"; "instalação de acesso venoso periférico". A "instalação de acesso venoso periférico com cateter Íntima®" correspondeu ao procedimento mais oneroso (US$ 8,90-DP=0,06). Considerando o registro da execução de 656 (100%) procedimentos, a estimativa do custo direto médio total correspondeu a US$ 866,18/ano. Conclusão: O conhecimento sobre os custos dos procedimentos pode subsidiar tomadas de decisão que incrementem a alocação eficiente dos recursos consumidos.

RESUMEN Objetivo: Identificar el costo directo promedio de los procedimientos realizados para el tratamiento del evento adverso de flebitis en pacientes de una Unidad de Hospitalización Clínica y estimar el costo de los procedimientos realizados para el tratamiento de flebitis en esta unidad. Método: Cuantitativo, exploratorio-descriptivo, tipo de estudio de caso único. Inicialmente, en 2017, se identificaron los registros de los procedimientos realizados para el tratamiento de la flebitis. Luego, el costo se calculó multiplicando el tiempo (cronometrado) gastado por los técnicos de enfermería por el costo unitario de la mano de obra directa, agregándolo al costo de los materiales. Resultados: Se informaron 107 flebitis referidas a 96 pacientes. En el tratamiento de los diferentes grados de flebitis, se llevaron a cabo tres procedimientos: "aplicación de ungüento de extracto de flor de manzanilla"; "Aplicación de compresas"; "Instalación de acceso venoso periférico". La "instalación de acceso venoso periférico con un catéter Íntima®" correspondió al procedimiento más costoso (US$ 8.90-SD=0.06). Considerando el registro de la ejecución de 656 (100%) procedimientos, la estimación del costo directo promedio total correspondió a US$ 866.18/año. Conclusión: El conocimiento sobre los costos de los procedimientos puede respaldar la toma de decisiones que aumenta la asignación eficiente de los recursos consumidos.

ABSTRACT Objective: To identify the average direct cost of the procedures performed for phlebitis treatment in patients in an Inpatient Unit and estimate the costs of the procedures performed to treat phlebitis in this unit. Method: A quantitative, exploratory-descriptive, single-case study. Initially, records of the procedures performed for phlebitis management were identified. Then, the cost was calculated by multiplying the execution time (timed using a chronometer) spent by nursing technicians by the unit cost of direct labor, added to the cost of materials in 2017. Results: 107 phlebitis referring to 96 patients were reported. To treat the different grades of phlebitis, three procedures were carried out "application of ointment of chamomile flower extract"; "Compress application"; "Peripheral venous access installation". "Peripheral venous access installation with Íntima® catheter" corresponded to the most expensive procedure (US$ 8.90-SD=0.06). Considering the record of the execution of 656 (100%) procedures, the total average direct cost estimate corresponded to US$ 866.18/year. Conclusion: Knowledge about the costs of procedures can support decision making that increase allocation efficiency of consumed resources.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of clinically indicated versus routine replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters.

BACKGROUND: Millions of peripheral intravenous catheters are used worldwide. The current guidelines recommend routine catheter replacement every 72-96 h. This practice requires increasing healthcare resource use. The clinically indicated catheter replacement strategy is proposed as an alternative. OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost effectiveness of clinically indicated versus routine replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of Queensland Health, Australia, was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial. Adult patients with an intravenous catheter of expected use for longer than 4 days were randomly assigned to receive either clinically indicated replacement or third-day routine replacement. The primary outcome was phlebitis during catheterization or within 48 h after catheter removal. Resource use data were prospectively collected and valued (2010 prices). The incremental net monetary benefit was calculated with uncertainty characterized using bootstrap simulations. Additionally, value of information (VOI) and value of implementation analyses were performed. RESULTS: The clinically indicated replacement strategy was associated with a cost saving per patient of AU$7.60 (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.96-10.62) and a non-significant difference in the phlebitis rate of 0.41% (95% CI -1.33 to 2.15). The incremental net monetary benefit was AU$7.60 (95% CI 4.96-10.62). The expected VOI was zero, whereas the expected value of perfect implementation of the clinically indicated replacement strategy was approximately AU$5 million over 5 years. CONCLUSION: The clinically indicated catheter replacement strategy is cost saving compared with routine replacement. It is recommended that healthcare organizations consider changing to a policy whereby catheters are changed only if clinically indicated.

Routine versus clinically indicated replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: a randomised controlled equivalence trial.

BACKGROUND: The millions of peripheral intravenous catheters used each year are recommended for 72-96 h replacement in adults. This routine replacement increases health-care costs and staff workload and requires patients to undergo repeated invasive procedures. The effectiveness of the practice is not well established. Our hypothesis was that clinically indicated catheter replacement is of equal benefit to routine replacement. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, non-blinded equivalence trial recruited adults (≥18 years) with an intravenous catheter of expected use longer than 4 days from three hospitals in Queensland, Australia, between May 20, 2008, and Sept 9, 2009. Computer-generated random assignment (1:1 ratio, no blocking, stratified by hospital, concealed before allocation) was to clinically indicated replacement, or third daily routine replacement. Patients, clinical staff, and research nurses could not be masked after treatment allocation because of the nature of the intervention. The primary outcome was phlebitis during catheterisation or within 48 h after removal. The equivalence margin was set at 3%. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints were catheter-related bloodstream and local infections, all bloodstream infections, catheter tip colonisation, infusion failure, catheter numbers used, therapy duration, mortality, and costs. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12608000445370. FINDINGS: All 3283 patients randomised (5907 catheters) were included in our analysis (1593 clinically indicated; 1690 routine replacement). Mean dwell time for catheters in situ on day 3 was 99 h (SD 54) when replaced as clinically indicated and 70 h (13) when routinely replaced. Phlebitis occurred in 114 of 1593 (7%) patients in the clinically indicated group and in 114 of 1690 (7%) patients in the routine replacement group, an absolute risk difference of 0·41% (95% CI -1·33 to 2·15%), which was within the prespecified 3% equivalence margin. No serious adverse events related to study interventions occurred. INTERPRETATION: Peripheral intravenous catheters can be removed as clinically indicated; this policy will avoid millions of catheter insertions, associated discomfort, and substantial costs in both equipment and staff workload. Ongoing close monitoring should continue with timely treatment cessation and prompt removal for complications. FUNDING: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

[The comparative costs of vancomycin treatment versus teicoplanin in osteoarticular infection caused by methicillin-resistant staphylococci]. / Le coût comparatif du traitement par vancomycine versus teicoplanine dans l'infection ostéoarticulaire à staphylocoques résistants à la méticilline.

This clinical and economical study compared two glycopeptides regimen i.e., vancomycin and teicoplanin in the treatment of osteoarticular infection involving methicillin-resistant staphylococcus. After randomization, 15 patients (group 1) received vancomycin (23 F per gram) in continuous infusion through a central venous catheter and 15 others (group 2) intramuscular teicoplanin (311-357 F a 400 mg vial). The clinical study focused on treatment tolerance in an in-patient setting as well as in a non in-patient one. The cost analysis focused on total expenses including those of antibiotics, those of medical devices for antibiotic administration and those of the complications caused by the antibiotics use. Total expenses per patient averaged 8744 F with vancomycin and 8555 F with teicoplanin (NS). The apparent money saving by using a cheap antibiotic (i.e. vancomycin) was illusionary as one took in account the expenses for medical devices e.g., central venous catheters required to administer vancomycin and the complications due to the use of these devices.

Streamlining antimicrobial therapy for lower respiratory tract infections.

Antimicrobial streamlining is the practice of converting a broad-spectrum empirical regimen to therapy with either a single, narrow-spectrum parenteral agent or an oral agent as soon as possible. This practice results in many benefits for the patient and the hospital. When intravenous catheters can be removed early, the frequencies of catheter-associated bacteremias and phlebitis are reduced, thus making it possible to avoid incurring major costs. With the availability of newer oral agents with favorable pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and microbiological profiles, such as the fluoroquinolones, the macrolides/azalides, and the cephalosporins, the clinician has greater opportunity to employ streamlining tactics. The patient who is hospitalized with a lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) often requires empirical antimicrobial therapy before the pathogen is identified. By day 3 of the hospital course, the pathogen is often known, the patient's condition may have stabilized, or both events may have occurred. At this point, streamlining is possible. At present, data suggest that rapid conversion from intravenous to oral antimicrobial therapy is safe and efficacious and should be considered for appropriate patients requiring hospitalization for LRTIs.

[Medical, social, economic value of the rational use of non-invasive studies for diagnosing phlebitis. Experience of the Regional Hospital Center of Nimes from 1984 to 1988]. / Intérêt médical, social, économique de l'utilisation rationnelle des explorations non vulnérantes pour le diagnostic de phlébite. Expérience du Centre Hospitalier Régional de Nîmes de 1984 à 1988.

Continuous wave Doppler, and B-Mode ultrasound allow the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis with a 96% sensitivity, and a 98% specificity versus venography (1). Therefore, these methods can be extensively used for the detection of deep venous thrombosis, following a new diagnostic algorithm: X ray venography is used only for the assessment of topographic extent of iliac and caval thrombosis, and when non invasive methods give equivocal results. As a result, the number of X ray venographies significantly decreased since 1984 (7) in Nîmes University Hospital. About 75% of patients with a deep venous thrombosis (diagnosed by non invasive methods) were treated without necessity of X ray venography.

DRGs: nursing documentation contributes to the bottom line.

Nursing documentation in the medical record is an important source of information for the medical record coder. Coded data are necessary for quality assurance, risk management, research and statistical purposes, as well as for proper DRG assignment for reimbursement. Facts gleaned from nursing documentation, supported by physician documentation and laboratory data, can often result in increased reimbursement for the hospital.