Cost-Effectiveness of Extracorporeal Photopheresis in Patients With Chronic Graft-vs-Host Disease.

Background: The mainstay first-line therapy for chronic graft-vs-host disease (cGVHD) is corticosteroids; however, for steroid-refractory patients, there is a distinct lack of cost-effective or efficacious treatment. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) compared with standard-of-care therapies for the treatment of cGVHD in Australia. The study formed part of an application to the Australian Government to reimburse ECP for these patients. Methods: A cost-utility analysis was conducted comparing ECP to standard of care, which modeled the response to treatment and disease progression of cGVHD patients in Australia. Mycophenolate, tacrolimus, and cyclosporin comprised second-line standard of care based on a survey of Australian clinicians. Health states in the model included treatment response, disease progression, and death. Transition probabilities were obtained from Australian-specific registry data and randomized controlled evidence. Quality-of-life values were applied based on treatment response. The analysis considered costs of second-line treatment and disease management including immunosuppressants, hospitalizations and subsequent therapy. Disease-specific mortality was calculated for treatment response and progression. Results: Over a 10-year time horizon, ECP resulted in an average cost reduction of $23 999 and an incremental improvement of 1.10 quality-adjusted life-years per patient compared with standard of care. The sensitivity analysis demonstrated robustness over a range of plausible scenarios. Conclusion: This analysis demonstrates that ECP improves quality of life, minimizes the harms associated with immunosuppressant therapy, and is a highly cost-effective option for steroid-refractory cGVHD patients in Australia. Based in part on this analysis, ECP was listed on the Medicare Benefits Schedule for public reimbursement.

How environmental impact is considered in economic evaluations of critical care: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: Health care is a major contributor to climate change, and critical care is one of the sector's highest carbon emitters. Health economic evaluations form an important component of critical care and may be useful in identifying economically efficient and environmentally sustainable strategies. The purpose of this scoping review was to synthesise available literature on whether and how environmental impact is considered in health economic evaluations of critical care. METHODS: A robust scoping review methodology was used to identify studies reporting on environmental impact in health economic evaluations of critical care. We searched six academic databases to locate health economic evaluations, costing studies and life cycle assessments of critical care from 1993 to present. RESULTS: Four studies met the review's inclusion criteria. Of the 278 health economic evaluations of critical care identified, none incorporated environmental impact into their assessments. Most included studies (n = 3/4) were life cycle assessments, and the remaining study was a prospective observational study. Life cycle assessments used a combination of process-based data collection and modelling to incorporate environmental impact into their economic assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Health economic evaluations of critical care have not yet incorporated environmental impact into their assessments, and few life cycle assessments exist that are specific to critical care therapies and treatments. Guidelines and standardisation regarding environmental data collection and reporting in health care are needed to support further research in the field. In the meantime, those planning health economic evaluations should include a process-based life cycle assessment to establish key environmental impacts specific to critical care.

Sepsis-coded hospitalisations and associated costs in Australia: a retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To report trends in Australian hospitalisations coded for sepsis and their associated costs. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of Australian national hospitalisation data from 2002 to 2021. METHODS: Sepsis-coded hospitalisations were identified using the Global Burden of Disease study sepsis-specific ICD-10 codes modified for Australia. Costs were calculated using Australian-Refined Diagnosis Related Group codes and National Hospital Cost Data Collection. RESULTS: Sepsis-coded hospitalisations increased from 36,628 in 2002-03 to 131,826 in 2020-21, an annual rate of 7.8%. Principal admission diagnosis codes contributed 13,843 (37.8%) in 2002-03 and 44,186 (33.5%) in 2020-21; secondary diagnosis codes contributed 22,785 (62.2%) in 2002-03 and 87,640 (66.5%) in 2020-21. Unspecified sepsis was the most common sepsis code, increasing from 15,178 hospitalisations in 2002-03 to 68,910 in 2020-21. The population-based incidence of sepsis-coded hospitalisations increased from 18.6 to 10,000 population (2002-03) to 51.3 per 10,000 (2021-21); representing an increase from 55.1 to 10,000 hospitalisations in 2002-03 to 111.4 in 2020-21. Sepsis-coded hospitalisations occurred more commonly in the elderly; those aged 65 years or above accounting for 20,573 (55.6%) sepsis-coded hospitalisations in 2002-03 and 86,135 (65.3%) in 2020-21. The cost of sepsis-coded hospitalisations increased at an annual rate of 20.6%, from AUD199M (€127 M) in financial year 2012 to AUD711M (€455 M) in 2019. CONCLUSION: Hospitalisations coded for sepsis and associated costs increased significantly from 2002 to 2021 and from 2012 to 2019, respectively.

Corrigendum to "Statistical analysis plan for the BLING III study: a phase 3 multicentre randomised controlled trial of continuous versus intermittent ß-lactam antibiotic infusion in critically ill patients with sepsis" [Crit Care Resusc 23(3) (2021) 273-284].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.51893/2021.3.oa4.].

Feasibility of providing collaborative glaucoma care from a community optometry perspective: a mixed-methods assessment.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Despite evidence showing that optometry-led collaborative glaucoma care can be delivered at reduced cost compared to ophthalmology-based care without compromising patient outcomes, such models of care are not widely practiced in Australia. Ensuring glaucoma patients have equitable access to effective and cost-effective care is a matter of public health importance. BACKGROUND: This study examined the feasibility and business case assessment for providing glaucoma care from a community optometry perspective. METHODS: Nine optometrists were interviewed in a semi-structured format, focusing on the economic feasibility, barriers, and benefits of collaborative glaucoma care. The Consolidated Framework for Intervention Research was used for thematic data analysis. Costs and revenues associated with providing glaucoma care were sourced from the literature and interviews. A business case model assessing the profitability of glaucoma care in optometric practice was developed. RESULTS: Thematic analysis revealed concerns over financial viability such that current Medicare Benefits Schedule fees are not sufficient to justify the cost of running a community optometry glaucoma clinic. All participants received a supplementary source of revenue. This finding was confirmed by the business case assessment. Inter-professional trust was perceived to be a key barrier to initiation of collaborative care however was able to be overcome quickly upon commencement of a collaborative care relationship. Optometrists perceived that collaborative care was beneficial to all involved, including patients, ophthalmologists, optometrists, and health payers. There was a perception of a growing divide between clinical and retail optometry, which was thought by most participants to be appropriate. CONCLUSION: This study is the first to explore the feasibility and business case for community-based optometrists to provide collaborative glaucoma care in Australia. Our findings show that current public funding is insufficient to justify the business case to private optometry practice, despite being perceived by optometrists as beneficial to all involved.

Economic evaluations for intensive care unit randomised clinical trials in Australia and New Zealand: Practical recommendations for researchers.

OBJECTIVES: Economic evaluations of intensive care unit (ICU) interventions have specific considerations, including how to cost ICU stays and accurately measure quality of life in survivors. The aim of this article was to develop best practice recommendations for economic evaluations alongside future ICU randomised controlled trials (RCTs). REVIEW METHODS: We collated our experience based on expert consensus across several recent economic evaluations to provide best-practice, practical recommendations for researchers conducting economic evaluations alongside RCTs in the ICU. Recommendations were structured according to the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) Task Force Report. RESULTS: We discuss recommendations across the components of economic evaluations, including: types of economic evaluation, the population and sample size, study perspective, comparators, time horizon, choice of health outcomes, measurement of effectiveness, measurement and valuation of quality of life, estimating resources and costs, analytical methods, and the increment cost-effectiveness ratio. We also provide future directions for research with regard to developing more robust economic evaluations for the ICU. CONCLUSION: Economic evaluations should be built alongside ICU RCTs and should be designed a priori using appropriate follow-up and data collection to capture patient-relevant outcomes. Further work is needed to improve the quality of data available for linkage in Australia as well as developing costing methods for the ICU and appropriate quality of life measurements.

Strategies for the implementation of the living guidelines for cochlear implantation in adults.

Introduction: Clinical guidelines for cochlear implants (CI) exist in several countries, however, they lack consistency and often do not encompass the full user journey. This study aims to explore the barriers and facilitators for implementing global Living Guidelines for cochlear implantation in adults with severe, profound or moderate sloping to profound sensorineural hearing loss (SPSNHL) as well as identify guideline implementation (GI) tools that may support uptake. Methods: A convenience sample of Task Force members were recruited for semi-structured interviews. Interview transcripts were thematically analysed to group country-specific barriers, facilitators and GI tools into three levels: health care provider (HCP), consumer and structural. Once identified, barriers and facilitators were classified into four themes related to awareness, economic, guideline or other. Results: Interviews were conducted with 38 Task Force members, representing 20 countries. Lack of CI and hearing loss awareness was a major barrier at the HCP (85% of countries), consumer (80%) and structural (20%) levels. Economic and guideline barriers followed at the HCP (35%; 25%), consumer (45%; 0%) and structural (55%; 30%) levels, respectively. Facilitators focused on raising awareness of hearing loss and CIs as well as guideline related initiates at the HCP (80%; 70%), consumer (70%; 10%) and structural (25%; 70%) levels. GI tools including education, economic evaluations, quick reference resources and social media can help improve awareness and uptake. Conclusion: Awareness is the primary barrier to implementing Living Guidelines globally for adults with SPSNHL. Endorsement from key professional bodies and using the best available evidence can enhance uptake.

Advancing Health Research Impact through a Systemic Multi-Sectoral Approach: A Protocol for Introducing Reduced-Sodium Salts and Salty Condiments in Vietnam.

Better alignment between health research organisations with the needs (and interests) of key stakeholders in the health policy and research system is critical to improving research impact. The George Institute for Global Health's 'Healthier Societies' program focuses on harnessing the power of governments, markets, and communities to improve population level health equity outcomes and maximise research impact. This protocol outlines a systemic multi-sectoral approach to advance health research impact globally applied to a project to reduce population salt intake in Vietnam by introducing reduced-sodium salts and salty condiments. We defined a systemic multi-sectoral approach to be a strategy that involves engaging with government, market and communities in a deliberate and joined-up way to solve a problem in which they all have a role to play. The project objectives are to: (i) produce reduced-sodium fish sauce products and test consumer acceptability; (ii) investigate the market feasibility of introducing reduced-sodium foods (salt, bot canh and fish sauce) into the Vietnamese market; (iii) estimate the cost-effectiveness of three different government strategies to support the implementation of reduced-sodium products; and (iv) develop an advocacy roadmap to maximise potential research impact. Methods will include standard quality and safety assessments, consumer sensory testing for the locally produced reduced-sodium fish sauces, market feasibility assessment (including collating market data and semi-structured interviews with stakeholders), cost-effectiveness modelling (Markov cohort model), multi-sector stakeholder engagement, and the development of a coordinated advocacy strategy using the Kotter Plus framework. Health research organisations are increasingly seeking ways to achieve greater impact with their research. Through the application of a systemic multi-sectoral approach with governments, markets and communities, this protocol provides an example of how health research projects can achieve such impact.

Effect of Selective Decontamination of the Digestive Tract on Hospital Mortality in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Whether selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) reduces mortality in critically ill patients remains uncertain. Objective: To determine whether SDD reduces in-hospital mortality in critically ill adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cluster, crossover, randomized clinical trial that recruited 5982 mechanically ventilated adults from 19 intensive care units (ICUs) in Australia between April 2018 and May 2021 (final follow-up, August 2021). A contemporaneous ecological assessment recruited 8599 patients from participating ICUs between May 2017 and August 2021. Interventions: ICUs were randomly assigned to adopt or not adopt a SDD strategy for 2 alternating 12-month periods, separated by a 3-month interperiod gap. Patients in the SDD group (n = 2791) received a 6-hourly application of an oral paste and administration of a gastric suspension containing colistin, tobramycin, and nystatin for the duration of mechanical ventilation, plus a 4-day course of an intravenous antibiotic with a suitable antimicrobial spectrum. Patients in the control group (n = 3191) received standard care. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality within 90 days. There were 8 secondary outcomes, including the proportion of patients with new positive blood cultures, antibiotic-resistant organisms (AROs), and Clostridioides difficile infections. For the ecological assessment, a noninferiority margin of 2% was prespecified for 3 outcomes including new cultures of AROs. Results: Of 5982 patients (mean age, 58.3 years; 36.8% women) enrolled from 19 ICUs, all patients completed the trial. There were 753/2791 (27.0%) and 928/3191 (29.1%) in-hospital deaths in the SDD and standard care groups, respectively (mean difference, -1.7% [95% CI, -4.8% to 1.3%]; odds ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.82-1.02]; P = .12). Of 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, 6 showed no significant differences. In the SDD vs standard care groups, 23.1% vs 34.6% had new ARO cultures (absolute difference, -11.0%; 95% CI, -14.7% to -7.3%), 5.6% vs 8.1% had new positive blood cultures (absolute difference, -1.95%; 95% CI, -3.5% to -0.4%), and 0.5% vs 0.9% had new C difficile infections (absolute difference, -0.24%; 95% CI, -0.6% to 0.1%). In 8599 patients enrolled in the ecological assessment, use of SDD was not shown to be noninferior with regard to the change in the proportion of patients who developed new AROs (-3.3% vs -1.59%; mean difference, -1.71% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -∞ to 4.31%] and 0.88% vs 0.55%; mean difference, -0.32% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -∞ to 5.47%]) in the first and second periods, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation, SDD, compared with standard care without SDD, did not significantly reduce in-hospital mortality. However, the confidence interval around the effect estimate includes a clinically important benefit. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02389036.

Cost-Effectiveness of Extracorporeal Photopheresis for the Treatment of Patients With Erythrodermic (Stage T4, M0) Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma in the Australian Setting.

OBJECTIVES: Cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) is a rare and incurable disease, and patients currently experience a lack of treatment options in Australia. This analysis evaluated the cost-effectiveness of extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) compared with standard of care therapy for the treatment of patients with erythrodermic (stage T4, M0) CTCL, who are refractory to previous systemic treatment. METHODS: A Markov model was developed from the perspective of the Australian government. Health states were treatment specific and transition probabilities were modeled from time-to-next-treatment data from a published Australian observational study of ECP and comparator treatments. Quality of life utility values were based on psoriasis as a proxy for CTCL, which was validated by consultation with local clinicians. The time horizon for the model was 5 years. The ECP treatment regimen was compared with a weighted treatment comparator based on results of a treatment survey and Australian prescribing data. RESULTS: ECP as a second-line treatment option for CTCL was less costly and more effective than other treatment strategies. ECP had an average cost saving of $37 592 and incremental quality-adjusted life-year gained of 0.20 to 0.21, attributed to patients being able to better tolerate ECP thus avoiding subsequent treatment with high-cost alternatives. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first published cost-utility analysis of ECP for CTCL. This analysis demonstrates that ECP is a cost-effective option for the treatment of patients with erythrodermic CTCL in Australia.

Balanced Multielectrolyte Solution versus Saline in Critically Ill Adults.

BACKGROUND: Whether the use of balanced multielectrolyte solution (BMES) in preference to 0.9% sodium chloride solution (saline) in critically ill patients reduces the risk of acute kidney injury or death is uncertain. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, we assigned critically ill patients to receive BMES (Plasma-Lyte 148) or saline as fluid therapy in the intensive care unit (ICU) for 90 days. The primary outcome was death from any cause within 90 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes were receipt of new renal-replacement therapy and the maximum increase in the creatinine level during ICU stay. RESULTS: A total of 5037 patients were recruited from 53 ICUs in Australia and New Zealand - 2515 patients were assigned to the BMES group and 2522 to the saline group. Death within 90 days after randomization occurred in 530 of 2433 patients (21.8%) in the BMES group and in 530 of 2413 patients (22.0%) in the saline group, for a difference of -0.15 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -3.60 to 3.30; P = 0.90). New renal-replacement therapy was initiated in 306 of 2403 patients (12.7%) in the BMES group and in 310 of 2394 patients (12.9%) in the saline group, for a difference of -0.20 percentage points (95% CI, -2.96 to 2.56). The mean (±SD) maximum increase in serum creatinine level was 0.41±1.06 mg per deciliter (36.6±94.0 µmol per liter) in the BMES group and 0.41±1.02 mg per deciliter (36.1±90.0 µmol per liter) in the saline group, for a difference of 0.01 mg per deciliter (95% CI, -0.05 to 0.06) (0.5 µmol per liter [95% CI, -4.7 to 5.7]). The number of adverse and serious adverse events did not differ meaningfully between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that the risk of death or acute kidney injury among critically ill adults in the ICU was lower with the use of BMES than with saline. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the Health Research Council of New Zealand; PLUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02721654.).

Long-term costs and cost-effectiveness of adjunctive corticosteroids for patients with septic shock in New Zealand.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine whether adjunctive hydrocortisone reduced healthcare expenditure and was cost-effective compared with placebo in New Zealand patients in the Adjunctive Glucocorticoid Therapy in Patients with Septic Shock (ADRENAL) trial. DESIGN: This is a health economic analysis using data linkage to New Zealand Ministry of Health databases to determine resource use, costs, and cost-effectiveness for a 24-month period. SETTING: The study was conducted in New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION: Patients with septic shock were randomised to receive a 7-day continuous infusion of 200 mg of hydrocortisone or placebo in the ADRENAL trial. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Healthcare expenditure was associated with all hospital admissions, emergency department presentations, outpatient visits, and pharmacy expenditure. Effectiveness outcomes included mortality at 6 months and 24 months and quality of life at 6 months. Cost-effectiveness outcomes were assessed with reference to quality-adjusted life years gained at 6 months and life years gained at 24 months. RESULTS: Of 3800 patients in the ADRENAL trial, 419 (11.0%) were eligible, and 405 (96.7% of those eligible) were included. The mean total costs per patient over 24 months were $143,627 ± 100,890 and $143,772 ± 97,117 for the hydrocortisone and placebo groups, respectively (p = 0.99). Intensive care unit costs for the index admission were $50,492 and $62,288 per patient for the hydrocortisone and placebo groups, respectively (p = 0.09). The mean number of quality-adjusted life years gained at 6 months and mean number of life years gained at 24 months was not significantly different by treatment group, and the probability of hydrocortisone being cost-effective was 55% at 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: In New Zealand, adjunctive hydrocortisone did not reduce total healthcare expenditure or improve outcomes compared with placebo in patients with septic shock.

A Budget Impact Model for the use of Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients with Symptomatic Lower-Limb Peripheral Arterial Disease: An Australian Perspective.

PURPOSE: Improvement in long-term outcomes through innovative, cost-effective medical technologies is a focus for endovascular procedures aimed at treating symptomatic lower-limb peripheral arterial disease (PAD). The advent of drug-eluting stents (DES) has improved symptomatic PAD treatment via a reduction in high rates of target lesion revascularisation (TLR). The present study aimed to compare the 5-year financial impact of treatment with Eluvia, a new paclitaxel-eluting stent, versus treatment with Zilver PTX, a drug-coated stent, among patients in Australia by developing a budget impact model (BIM). METHODS: A BIM was developed from an Australian public hospital payer perspective using Australian national cost weights (AUD), published literature, and public hospital audit data. Clinical outcomes, including clinically driven TLRs (CD-TLRs), adverse events, and length of stay, were based on the 2-year results of the IMPERIAL trial, which compared Eluvia DES to Zilver PTX. RESULTS: Assuming EVP eligibility rate of 80% and DES uses rate ranging from 10 to 28% (superficial femoral artery lesions only), the 5-year model forecasted a treatment population between 14,428 and 40,399 patients. The model estimated 1499-4198 fewer CD-TLRs and 16,515-46,243 fewer hospital days with Eluvia DES use. This translated to 5-year potential savings of $4.3-$12.1 million to the Australian public hospital payer attributable to reduced CD-TLRs for Eluvia DES and $33.1-$92.6 million to Australian public hospitals owing to reduced adverse events and hospital bed days. CONCLUSION: Eluvia DES use as treatment for symptomatic lower-limb PAD could lead to potential savings for the Australian public healthcare system based on improved patient outcomes.

The cost-effectiveness of government actions to reduce sodium intake through salt substitutes in Vietnam.

BACKGROUND: Dietary sodium reduction is recommended to reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease. In Vietnam food products including salt, fish sauce and bot canh contribute to ~ 70% of dietary sodium intake. Reduced sodium versions of these products can be produced by replacing some of the sodium chloride with potassium chloride. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of three alternative approaches to introducing reduced sodium products onto the market with a view to lowering population sodium intake in Vietnam. METHODS: The three salt substitution strategies included voluntary, subsidised and regulatory approaches targeting salt, fish sauce and bot canh products. Costs were modelled using the WHO-CHOICE methodology. A Markov cohort model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of each strategy versus no intervention from the government perspective. The model linked each intervention strategy to assumed changes in levels of sodium intake and then to systolic blood pressure. Changes in SBP were linked to a probability of ischaemic heart disease or stroke. The model followed people over their lifetime to assess average costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gained for each strategy. RESULTS: The voluntary salt substitution strategy was assumed to require no investment by government. Following ramp up (years 6+), the average annual costs for the subsidised and regulatory strategies were 21,808,968,902 ₫ (US$ 977,354) and 12,949,953,247 ₫ (US$ 580,410) respectively. Relative to no intervention, all three salt substitution strategies were found to be cost-effective. Cost savings were driven by reductions in strokes (32,595; 768,384; 2,366,480) and ischaemic heart disease (IHD) events (22,830; 537,157; 1,648,590) for the voluntary, subsidised & regulatory strategies, respectively. The voluntary strategy was least cost-effective (- 3445 ₫ US$ -0.15; 0.009 QALYs gained) followed by the subsidised strategy (- 43,189 ₫ US$ -1.86; 0.022 QALYs gained) and the regulatory strategy delivered the highest cost savings and health gains (- 243,530 ₫ US$ -10.49; 0.074 QALYs gained). CONCLUSION: This research shows that all three modelled salt substitution strategies would be good value for money relative to no intervention in Vietnam. The subsidised alternative would require the highest level of government investment; however the implementation costs will be exceeded by healthcare savings assuming a reasonable time horizon is considered.

Protocol summary and statistical analysis plan for the Selective Decontamination of the Digestive Tract in Intensive Care Unit Patients (SuDDICU) crossover, cluster randomised controlled trial.

Background: It is unclear whether the use of selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) improves outcomes in ventilated patients in intensive care units (ICUs) and whether SDD is associated with the development of antibiotic resistance. Objective: To describe the study protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Selective Decontamination of the Digestive Tract in Intensive Care Unit Patients (SuDDICU) trial. Design, setting, participants and intervention: SuDDICU is an international, crossover, cluster randomised controlled trial of mechanically ventilated patients in ICUs using two 12-month trial periods. For each period, participating ICUs will implement SDD plus standard care or standard care alone. The SuDDICU drug intervention is an oral paste and gastric suspension of three antibiotics combined with a 4-day course of intravenous antibiotics. Observational ecological assessments will be conducted during five surveillance periods. The trial will be conducted in 19 ICUs in Australia and ten ICUs in Canada and the United Kingdom, and will recruit 15 000-17 000 patients. Recruitment commenced in Australia in 2017. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome is all-cause hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes include: duration of ventilation, ICU stay and hospital stay; incidence of new antibiotic-resistant organisms during the index ICU admission; changes in antibiotic-resistant organism rates; incidence of new Clostridioides difficile infections; and total use of antibiotics. Results and conclusions: SuDDICU will determine whether the use of SDD plus standard care is associated with a reduction in hospital mortality in ventilated ICU patients compared with standard care alone. It will also quantify the impact of the use of SDD on the development of antibiotic resistance. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12615000411549) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02389036).

Statistical analysis plan for the BLING III study: a phase 3 multicentre randomised controlled trial of continuous versus intermittent ß-lactam antibiotic infusion in critically ill patients with sepsis.

Background: The ß-Lactam Infusion Group (BLING) III study is a prospective, multicentre, open, phase 3 randomised controlled trial comparing continuous infusion with intermittent infusion of ß-lactam antibiotics in 7000 critically ill patients with sepsis. Objective: To describe a statistical analysis plan for the BLING III study. Methods: The statistical analysis plan was designed by the trial statistician and chief investigators and approved by the BLING III management committee before the completion of data collection. Statistical analyses for primary, secondary and tertiary outcomes and planned subgroup analyses are described in detail. Interim analysis by the Data Safety and Monitoring Committee (DSMC) has been conducted in accordance with a pre-specified DSMC charter. Results and conclusions: The statistical analysis plan for the BLING III study is published before completion of data collection and unblinding to minimise analysis bias and facilitate public access and transparent analysis and reporting of study findings. Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Registry NCT03212990.

The Plasma-Lyte 148 versus Saline (PLUS) statistical analysis plan: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial of the effect of intensive care fluid therapy on mortality.

Background and objective: The Plasma-Lyte 148 versus Saline (PLUS) study is a prospective, multicentre, parallel-group, concealed, blinded, randomised controlled trial comparing the effect of Plasma-Lyte 148 versus 0.9% sodium chloride (saline) for fluid resuscitation and other fluid therapy on 90-day mortality among critically ill adults requiring fluid resuscitation. The original target for recruitment was 8800 participants, which was reduced to 5000 participants following the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in 2020. This article describes the statistical analysis plan for the PLUS study. Methods: The statistical analysis plan was developed by the study statistician, chief investigator, and project manager, and was approved by the Management Committee before unblinding. The plan describes in detail the analysis of baseline characteristics, process measures, and outcomes, including covariate adjustments, subgroup analyses, missing data handling, and sensitivity analyses. Results and conclusions: A statistical analysis plan for the PLUS study was developed. This pre-specified plan accords with high quality standards of internal validity and should minimise future analysis bias.

An international comparison of the cost of fluid resuscitation therapies.

OBJECTIVE: Fluid resuscitation is a ubiquitous intervention in the management of patients treated in the intensive care unit, which has implications for intensive care unit resourcing and budgets. Our objective was to calculate the relative cost of resuscitation fluids in several countries to inform future economic evaluations. METHODS: We collected site-level data regarding the availability and cost of fluids as part of an international survey. We normalised costs to net present values using purchasing power parities and published inflation figures. Costs were also adjusted for equi-effective dosing based on intravascular volume expansion effectiveness and expressed as US dollars (USD) per 100 mL crystalloid equivalent. RESULTS: A total of 187 sites had access to cost data. Between countries, there was an approximate six fold variation in the cost of crystalloids and colloids overall. The average cost for crystalloids overall was less than 1 USD per 100 mL. In contrast, colloid fluids had higher average costs (59 USD per 100 mL). After adjusting for equi-effective dosing, saline was ∼27 times less costly than albumin (saline: 0.6 USD per 100 mL crystalloid equivalent; albumin 4-5%: 16.4 USD; albumin 20-25%: 15.8 USD) and ∼4 times less costly than hydroxyethyl starch solution (saline: 0.6 USD; hydroxyethyl starch solution: 2.5 USD). Buffered salt solutions, such as compound sodium acetate solutions (e.g., Plasmalyte®), had the highest average cost of crystalloid fluids, costing between 3 and 4 USD per 100 mL. CONCLUSION: The cost of fluid varies substantially between fluid types and between countries, although normal (0.9%) saline is consistently less costly than colloid preparations and some buffered salt solutions. These data can be used to inform future economic evaluations of fluid preparations.

The cost-effectiveness of adjunctive corticosteroids for patients with septic shock.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether hydrocortisone is a cost-effective treatment for patients with septic shock. DESIGN: Data linkage-based cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING: New South Wales and Queensland intensive care units. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION: Patients with septic shock randomly assigned to treatment with hydrocortisone or placebo in the Adjunctive Glucocorticoid Therapy in Patients with Septic Shock (ADRENAL) trial. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Health-related quality of life at 6 months using the EuroQoL 5-dimension 5-level questionnaire. Data on hospital resource use and costs were obtained by linking the ADRENAL dataset to government administrative health databases. Clinical outcomes included mortality, health-related quality of life, and quality-adjusted life-years gained; economic outcomes included hospital resource use, costs and cost-effectiveness from the health care payer perspective. We also assessed cost-effectiveness by sex. To increase the precision of cost-effectiveness estimates, we conducted unrestricted bootstrapping. RESULTS: Of 3800 patients in the ADRENAL trial, 1772 (46.6%) were eligible and 1513 (85.4% of those eligible) were included. There was no difference between hydrocortisone or placebo groups in regards to mortality (218/742 [29.4%] v 227/759 [29.9%]; HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78-1.12; P = 0.47), mean number of QALYs gained (0.10 ± 0.09 v 0.10 ± 0.09; P = 0.52), or total hospital costs (A$73 515 ± 61 376 v A$69 748 ± 61 793; mean difference, A$3767; 95% CI, -A$2891 to A$10 425; P = 0.27). The incremental cost of hydrocortisone was A$1 254 078 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. In females, hydrocortisone was cost-effective in 46.2% of bootstrapped replications and in males it was cost-effective in 2.7% of bootstrapped replications. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive hydrocortisone did not significantly affect longer term mortality, health-related quality of life, health care resource use or costs, and is unlikely to be cost-effective.