How Much Money Should be Paid for a Patient to Isolate During the COVID-19 Outbreak? A Discrete Choice Experiment in Iran.

INTRODUCTION: Isolation of COVID-19 patients is a vital strategy for preventing the spread of the virus. Isolation without any incentive or compensation for the patients cannot be effective. We sought to find the monetary value of the willingness to accept (WTA) being isolated for COVID-19 in Iran. METHODS: In this discrete choice experiment, scenarios were designed by reviewing the literature and semi-structural interviews. Fourteen choice sets with two scenarios were included in an internet-based questionnaire that was sent to the Telegram Social Network. A total of 617 individuals completed the questionnaire. A random-effects logistic regression model was used for the main analysis. RESULTS: The average monetary value of a WTA 7 days of isolation was US$51.71 (95% confidence interval [CI] 43.09-60.33). The WTA for one day of isolation was US$1.48 (95% CI 1.11-1.85) for unemployed groups, US$1.49 (95% CI 1.18-1.79) for office employees and US$1.36 (95% CI 0.73-2.01) for manual workers. The WTA was 0.44 (95% CI 0.35-0.53) US$ for low-income groups, US$0.68 (95% CI 0.52-0.84) for middle-income groups and US$0.77 (95% CI 0.35-1.18) for high-income groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggested that financial preferences for being isolated vary widely across individuals within different socioeconomic groups. Policymakers should consider these differences when designing effective intervention to increase compliance with the isolation protocols during infectious disease outbreaks.

The daily direct costs of isolating patients identified with highly resistant micro-organisms in a non-outbreak setting.

BACKGROUND: Isolation precautions are recommended when caring for patients identified with highly resistant micro-organisms (HRMOs). However, the direct costs of patients in isolation are largely unknown. AIM: To obtain detailed information on the daily direct costs associated with isolating patients identified with HRMOs. METHODS: This study was performed from November until December 2017 on a 12-bed surgical ward. This ward contained solely isolation rooms with anterooms. The daily direct costs of isolation were based on three cost items: (1) additional personal protective equipment (PPE), measured by counting the consumption of empty packaging materials; (2) cleaning and disinfection of the isolation room, based on the costs of an outsourced cleaning company; and (3) additional workload for healthcare workers, based on literature and multiplied by the average gross hourly salary of nurses. A distinction was made between the costs for strict isolation, contact-plus isolation, and contact isolation. FINDINGS: During the study period, 26 patients were nursed in isolation because of HRMO carriage. Time for donning and doffing of PPE was 31 min per day. The average daily direct costs of isolation were the least expensive for contact isolation (gown, gloves), €28/$31, and the most expensive for strict isolation (surgical mask, gloves, gown, cap), €41/$47. CONCLUSION: Using a novel, easy method to estimate consumption of PPE, we conclude that the daily direct costs of isolating a patient differ per type of isolation. Insight into the direct costs of isolation is of utmost importance when developing or updating infection prevention policies.

Financial and temporal costs of patient isolation in Norwegian hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Isolation of patients colonized or infected by antibiotic-resistant bacteria is an established infection-control measure taken in Norway. Local reliable data on the costs of this isolation are needed. METHODS: A micro-costing study from a healthcare perspective was conducted on infectious disease wards in three general acute hospitals, utilising direct observation, staff registration, interviews and survey data. FINDINGS: The daily additional cost of isolation was €56.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) 42.4-72.7) for non-bedridden patients and €87.5 (95% CI 48.3-129.6) for bedridden patients. Of these sums, labour costs accounted for the largest share (71-72%), followed by the costs of personal protective equipment (21-23%) and waste management (6-8%). Overall, isolation-specific workload amounted to 65 min/day for non-bedridden patients and 95 min/day for bedridden patients, predominantly in the form of extra time used by nurses. Higher isolation costs for bedridden patients were largely attributable to resources used for personal hygiene practices. One-time isolation costs incurred for room cleaning after patient discharge averaged at €14.0 (95% CI 10.7-17.6). CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides novel, detailed evidence on resource use attributable to patient isolation in hospitals that can be used to inform future assessments directed toward precautionary hygienic measures. Our results suggest that allocating additional nurse staffing to wards with large numbers of isolated patients should be considered.

Economic Incentives in the Socially Optimal Management of Infectious Disease: When [Formula: see text] is Not Enough.

Does society benefit from encouraging or discouraging private infectious disease-risk mitigation? Private individuals routinely mitigate infectious disease risks through the adoption of a range of precautions, from vaccination to changes in their contact with others. Such precautions have epidemiological consequences. Private disease-risk mitigation generally reduces both peak prevalence of symptomatic infection and the number of people who fall ill. At the same time, however, it can prolong an epidemic. A reduction in prevalence is socially beneficial. Prolongation of an epidemic is not. We find that for a large class of infectious diseases, private risk mitigation is socially suboptimal-either too low or too high. The social optimum requires either more or less private mitigation. Since private mitigation effort depends on the cost of mitigation and the cost of illness, interventions that change either of these costs may be used to alter mitigation decisions. We model the potential for instruments that affect the cost of illness to yield net social benefits. We find that where a disease is not very infectious or the duration of illness is short, it may be socially optimal to promote private mitigation effort by increasing the cost of illness. By contrast, where a disease is highly infectious or long lasting, it may be optimal to discourage private mitigation by reducing the cost of disease. Society would prefer a shorter, more intense, epidemic to a longer, less intense epidemic. There is, however, a region in parameter space where the relationship is more complicated. For moderately infectious diseases with medium infectious periods, the social optimum depends on interactions between prevalence and duration. Basic reproduction numbers are not sufficient to predict the social optimum.

Direct Costs of a Contact Isolation Day: A Prospective Cost Analysis at a Swiss University Hospital.

We prospectively evaluated direct costs of contact precautions using on-site observation. Additional mean costs per patient day were calculated for extra materials used, increased workload, and one-off isolation activities. The cost of contact precautions was $158.90 (95% confidence interval, $124.90‒$192.80) per patient day. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:101-103.

[Costs associated with multiresistant bacteria in neurorehabilitation]. / Mehrkosten durch multiresistente Erreger in der Neurorehabilitation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The number of patients with multiresistant bacteria (MRB) in rehabilitation facilities is increasing. The increasing costs of hygienic isolation measures reduce resources available for core rehabilitation services. In addition to the existing lack of care, patients with MRB are at further risk of being given lower priority for admission to rehabilitation facilities. Therefore, the Hygiene Commission of the German Society for Neurorehabilitation (DGNR) attempted to quantify the overall risk for deterioration of rehabilitation care due to the financial burden of MRB. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To analyze the added costs associated with the rehabilitation of patients with MBR, the DGNR Hygiene Commission identified criteria for a cost assessment. Direct (consumables, personnel and miscellaneous costs) and indirect costs of loss of opportunity were evaluated in seven neurorehabilitation centers in different states across Germany. RESULTS: On average, hygienic isolation measures amounted to direct costs of 144 € per day (47 € consumables, 92 € personnel, 5 € for other costs such as extra transportation expenditure) and indirect costs of 274 €, totaling 418 € per patient with MRB per day. Given that approximately 10% of patients had MRB, the added costs of hygienic isolation measures equaled about one tenth of the overall budget of a rehabilitation center and can be expected to rise with the increasing numbers of patients with MRB. CONCLUSIONS: Admission of patients carrying MRB to neurorehabilitation centers triggers added costs that critically diminish the overall capacity for centers to provide their core rehabilitation services.

Effect of target-enriched multiplex polymerase chain reaction on patient outcomes and costs during the 2013-14 influenza season.

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends the initial use of rapid antigen influenza diagnostic test (RIDT) for the detection of influenza A (H1N1-09). Nasopharyngeal samples were tested from 246 patients for H1N1-09 using target-enriched multiplex polymerase chain reaction (TEM-PCR), of which 163 were additionally tested via RIDT. RIDTs had a sensitivity of 18.7% compared with TEM-PCR as the reference standard. Patients with false-negative RIDTs were withheld from 111 days of oseltamivir and 65 days of isolation. Patients negative for H1N1 via TEM-PCR had antiviral therapy immediately stopped, thereby evading 408 days of oseltamivir and 315 days of unnecessary isolation. This cost avoidance saved US$208,982.

Carbapenemase-producing Acinetobacter baumannii: An outbreak report with special highlights on economic burden.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe the management of a carbapenemase-producing Acinetobacter baumannii (CP-AB) outbreak using the Outbreak Reports and Intervention Studies of Nosocomial Infection (ORION) statement. We also aimed to evaluate the cost of the outbreak and simulate costs if a dedicated unit to manage such outbreak had been set-up. METHODS: We performed a prospective epidemiological study. Multiple interventions were implemented including cohorting measures and limitation of admissions. Cost estimation was performed using administrative local data. RESULTS: Five patients were colonized with CP-AB and hospitalized in the neurosurgery ward. The index case was a patient who had been previously hospitalized in Portugal. Four secondary colonized patients were further observed within the unit. The strains of A. baumannii were shown to belong to the same clone and all of them produced an OXA-23 carbapenemase. The closure of the ward associated with the discharge of the five patients in a cohorting area of the Infectious Diseases Unit with dedicated staff put a stop to the outbreak. The estimated cost of this 17-week outbreak was $474,474. If patients had been managed in a dedicated unit - including specific area for cohorting of patients and dedicated staff - at the beginning of the outbreak, the estimated cost would have been $189,046. CONCLUSION: Controlling hospital outbreaks involving multidrug-resistant bacteria requires a rapid cohorting of patients. Using simulation, we highlighted cost gain when using a dedicated cohorting unit strategy for such an outbreak.

A mathematical model of Clostridium difficile transmission in medical wards and a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing different strategies for laboratory diagnosis and patient isolation.

BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a common and potentially fatal healthcare-associated infection. Improving diagnostic tests and infection control measures may prevent transmission. We aimed to determine, in resource-limited settings, whether it is more effective and cost-effective to allocate resources to isolation or to diagnostics. METHODS: We constructed a mathematical model of CDI transmission based on hospital data (9 medical wards, 350 beds) between March 2010 and February 2013. The model consisted of three compartments: susceptible patients, asymptomatic carriers and CDI patients. We used our model results to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis, comparing four strategies that were different combinations of 2 test methods (the two-step test and uniform PCR) and 2 infection control measures (contact isolation in multiple-bed rooms or single-bed rooms/cohorting). For each strategy, we calculated the annual cost (of CDI diagnosis and isolation) for a decrease of 1 in the average daily number of CDI patients; the strategy of the two-step test and contact isolation in multiple-bed rooms was the reference strategy. RESULTS: Our model showed that the average number of CDI patients increased exponentially as the transmission rate increased. Improving diagnosis by adopting uniform PCR assay reduced the average number of CDI cases per day per 350 beds from 9.4 to 8.5, while improving isolation by using single-bed rooms reduced the number to about 1; the latter was cost saving. CONCLUSIONS: CDI can be decreased by better isolation and more sensitive laboratory methods. From the hospital perspective, improving isolation is more cost-effective than improving diagnostics.

The Effect of Hospital Isolation Precautions on Patient Outcomes and Cost of Care: A Multi-Site, Retrospective, Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Isolation precautions have negative effects on patient safety, psychological well-being, and healthcare worker contact. However, it is not known whether isolation precautions affect certain hospital-related outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of isolation precautions on hospital-related outcomes and cost of care. DESIGN: Retrospective, propensity-score matched cohort study of inpatients admitted to general internal medicine (GIM) services at three academic hospitals in Toronto, Ontario, Canada between January 2010 and December 2012. PARTICIPANTS: Adult (≥18 years of age) patients on isolation precautions for respiratory illnesses and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) were matched to controls based on propensity scores derived from nine covariates: age, sex, Resource Intensity Weight, number of hospital readmissions within 90 days, total length of stay for hospital admissions within 90 days, site of admission, month of isolation, year of isolation, and Case Mix Group. MAIN MEASURES: Thirty-day readmission rates and emergency department visits, hospital length of stay, expected length of stay, adverse events, in-hospital mortality, patient complaints, and cost of care in Canadian doll ars (CAD). KEY RESULTS: A total of 17,649 non-isolated patients were admitted to the participating hospitals during the study period. We identified 1506 patients isolated for respiratory illnesses and 745 patients isolated for MRSA. Compared to non-isolated individuals, those on isolation precautions for respiratory illnesses stayed 17 % longer (95 % CI: 9 %, 25 %), stayed 9 % longer than expected (95 % CI: 3 %, 15 %), and had 23 % higher cost of care (95 % CI: 14 %, 32 %). Patients isolated for MRSA had similar outcomes, but they also had a 4.4 % higher (95 % CI: 1.4 %, 7.3 %) rate of readmission to hospital within 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Isolation precautions are associated with adverse effects which may result in poorer hospital outcomes. Balancing the benefits for the many with the harms to the few will be a future challenge.

Patient Isolation Precautions: Are They Worth It?

Isolation precautions are intended to minimize pathogen transmission and reduce hospital-acquired infections. More recently, the effectiveness of isolation precautions has been questioned because of increasing evidence of risks. These putative downsides are divided into a quantifiable monetary cost (i.e., a literal cost to the system) and clinically important but less easily quantifiable costs (i.e., "costs" to the patient). The authors also briefly review deisolation and alternatives to isolation. The present review is not arguing against appropriate isolation or precautions, simply that the authors consider both risks and benefits and disseminate up-to-date information. Their patient-focused goal is to mitigate risks for those who truly need isolating and to end isolation as soon as it is safe and appropriate to do so.

Costs and Benefits Associated with the MRSA Search and Destroy Policy in a Hospital in the Region Kennemerland, The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to analyze the costs and benefits of the MRSA Search and Destroy (S&D) policy between 2008 and 2013 in the Kennemer Gasthuis, a 400 bed teaching hospital in the region Kennemerland, the Netherlands. METHODS: A patient registration database was used to retrospectively calculate costs, including screening, isolation, follow-up, contact tracing, cleaning, treatment, deployment of extra healthcare workers, salary for an infection control practitioner (ICP) and service of isolation rooms. The estimated benefits (costs and lives when no MRSA S&D was applied) were based on a varying MRSA prevalence rate (up to 50%). RESULTS: When no MRSA S&D policy was applied, the additional costs and deaths due to MRSA bacteraemia were estimated to be € 1,388,907 and 33 respectively (at a MRSA prevalence rate of 50%). Currently, the total costs were estimated to be € 290,672 (€ 48,445 annually) and a MRSA prevalence rate of 17.3% was considered as break-even point. Between 2008 and 2013, a total of 576 high risk patients were screened for MRSA carriage, of whom 19 (3.3%) were found to be MRSA positive. Forty-nine patients (72.1%) were found unexpectedly. CONCLUSIONS: Application of the MRSA S&D policy saves lives and money, although the high rate of unexpected MRSA cases is alarming.

Review of a two-year methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus screening program and cost-effectiveness analysis in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) poses an increasingly large disease and economic burden worldwide. The effectiveness of screening programs in the tropics is poorly understood. The aims of this study are: (i) to analyze the factors affecting MRSA colonization at admission and acquisition during hospitalization and (ii) to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a screening program which aims to control MRSA incidence during hospitalization. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case-control study of patients admitted to the Communicable Disease Centre (CDC) in Singapore between Jan 2009 and Dec 2010 when there was an ongoing selective screening and isolation program. Risk factors contributing to MRSA colonization on admission and acquisition during hospital stay were evaluated using a logistic regression model. In addition, a cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted to determine the cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted due to implementing the screening and isolation program. RESULTS: The average prevalence rate of screened patients at admission and the average acquisition rate at discharge during the study period were 12.1 and 4.8 % respectively. Logistic regression models showed that older age (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.03, 95 % CI 1.02-1.04, p < 0.001) and dermatological conditions (adjusted OR 1.49, 95 % CI 1.11-1.20, p = 0.008) were independently associated with an increased risk of MRSA colonization at admission. Age (adjusted OR 1.02, 95 % CI 1.01-1.03, p = 0.002) and length of stay in hospital (adjusted OR 1.04, 95 % CI 1.03-1.06, p < 0.001) were independent factors associated with MRSA acquisition during hospitalization. The screening and isolation program reduced the acquisition rate by 1.6 % and was found to be cost saving. For the whole study period, the program cost US$129,916, while it offset hospitalization costs of US$103,869 and loss of productivity costs of US$50,453 with -400 $/DALY averted. DISCUSSION: This study is the first to our knowledge that evaluates the cost-effectiveness of screening and isolation of MRSA patients in a tropical country. Another unique feature of the analysis is the evaluation of acquisition rates among specific types of patients (dermatological, HIV and infectious disease patients)and the comparison of the cost-effectiveness of screening and isolation between them. CONCLUSIONS: Overall our results indicate high MRSA prevalence that can be cost effectively reduced by selective screening and isolation programs in Singapore.

Burden of isolation for multidrug-resistant organisms in a tertiary public hospital in Southern Brazil.

We aimed to describe the use of isolation beds between September 2011 and August 2013 at a tertiary hospital located in Southern Brazil. The main cause for isolation was gram-negative carbapenem-resistant bacteria. Huge costs were associated with isolation practices. Considering the high burden on the isolation ward, practice of surveillance cultures and contact isolation should be balanced with other infection control practices.

Dose rate in brachytherapy using after-loading machine: pulsed or high-dose rate?

Since February 2014, it is no longer possible to use low-dose rate 192 iridium wires due to the end of industrial production of IRF1 and IRF2 sources. The Brachytherapy Group of the French society of radiation oncology (GC-SFRO) has recommended switching from iridium wires to after-loading machines. Two types of after-loading machines are currently available, based on the dose rate used: pulsed-dose rate or high-dose rate. In this article, we propose a comparative analysis between pulsed-dose rate and high-dose rate brachytherapy, based on biological, technological, organizational and financial considerations.

Antiviral prophylaxis and isolation for the control of pandemic influenza.

Before effective vaccines become available, antiviral drugs are considered as the major control strategies for a pandemic influenza. However, perhaps such control strategies can be severely hindered by the low-efficacy of antiviral drugs. For this reason, using antiviral drugs and an isolation strategy is included in our study. A compartmental model that allows for imported exposed individuals and asymptomatic cases is used to evaluate the effectiveness of control strategies via antiviral prophylaxis and isolation. Simulations show that isolation strategy plays a prominent role in containing transmission when antiviral drugs are not effective enough. Moreover, relatively few infected individuals need to be isolated per day. Because the accurate calculations of the needed numbers of antiviral drugs and the isolated infected are not easily available, we give two simple expressions approximating these numbers. We also derive an estimation for the total cost of these intervention strategies. These estimations obtained by a simple method provide a useful reference for the management department about the epidemic preparedness plans.

Characteristics and costs of carbapenemase-producing enterobacteria carriers (2012/2013).

OBJECTIVES: We had for aim to determine the characteristics of carbapenemase-producing enterobacteria (CPE) carriers and to assess the economic impact of isolation measures leading to loss of activity (closed beds, prolonged hospital stays) and additional personnel hours. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study for 2years (2012/2013), in a French general hospital, focusing on CPE carriers with clinical case description. The costs were estimated by comparing the activity of concerned units (excluding the ICU) during periods with CPE carriers or contacts, during the same periods of the year (n-1), plus additional hours and rectal swabs. RESULTS: Sixteen EPC carriers were identified: 10 men and 6 women, 65±10years of age. Seven patients acquired EPC in hospital during 2 outbreaks in 2012. Four patients presented with an infection (peritonitis, catheter infection, and 2 cases of obstructive pyelonephritis) with a favorable outcome. The median length of stay was 21days [4,150]. Six patients died, 1 death was indirectly due to CPE because of inappropriate empiric antibiotic therapy. A decrease in activity was observed compared to the previous year with an estimated 547,303€ loss. The 1779 additional hours cost 63,870€, and 716 screening samples cost 30,931€. The total additional cost was estimated at 642,104€ for the institution. CONCLUSIONS: Specialized teams for CPE carriers and isolation of contact patients, required to avoid/control epidemics, have an important additional cost. An appreciation of their support is needed, as well as participation of rehabilitation units.

Analysis of MRSA-attributed costs of hospitalized patients in Germany.

Infections with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are assumed to have a high economic impact due to increased hygienic measures and prolonged hospital length of stay. However, surveys on the real expenditure for the prevention and treatment of MRSA are scarce, in particular with regard to the German Diagnosis-Related Groups (G-DRG) payment system. The aim of our study is to empirically assess the additional cost for MRSA management measures and to identify the main cost drivers in the whole process from the hospital's point of view. We conducted a one-year retrospective analysis of MRSA-positive cases in a German university hospital and determined the cost of hygienic measures, laboratory costs, and opportunity costs due to isolation time and extended lengths of stay. A total of 182 cases were included in the analysis. The mean length of hospital stay was 22.75 days and the mean time in isolation was 17.08 days, respectively. Overall, the calculated MRSA-attributable costs were 8,673.04 per case, with opportunity costs making up, by far, the largest share (77.45 %). Our study provides a detailed up-to-date analysis of MRSA-attributed costs in a hospital. It allows a current comparison to previous studies worldwide. Moreover, it offers the prerequisites to investigate the adequate reimbursement of MRSA burden in the DRG payment system and to assess the efficiency of targeted hygienic measures in the prevention of MRSA.

Cost of isolation: daily cost of isolation determined and cost avoidance demonstrated from the overuse of personal protective equipment in an acute care facility.

We determined the prevalence and associated cost of isolation precautions. Current census and historic microbiology cultures were assessed for isolation appropriateness following national guidelines. Based on patient assessment and culture data, isolation was discontinued resulting in 4,087 days of isolation and over $141,000 dollars avoided from excess supplies and time.