Cost effectiveness of antimicrobial catheters in the intensive care unit: addressing uncertainty in the decision

doi:10.1186/cc7744

Critical Care
Volume 13
Issue 2

Viewing options:

Abstract
Full text
PDF (394KB)
Additional files

Associated material:

PubMed record

Related literature:

Articles citing this article
on BioMed Central
on Google Scholar
on ISI Web of Science
on PubMed Central
Other articles by authors
on Google Scholar

Halton KA
Cook DA
Whitby M
Paterson DL
Graves N

on PubMed

Halton KA
Cook DA
Whitby M
Paterson DL
Graves N
Related articles/pages
on Google

on Google Scholar

on PubMed

Tools:

Nominate for award

Post to:

Research

Cost effectiveness of antimicrobial catheters in the intensive care unit: addressing uncertainty in the decision

Kate A Halton¹^,2 , David A Cook³ , Michael Whitby⁴ , David L Paterson¹^,5 and Nicholas Graves¹^,2

¹The Centre for Healthcare Related Infection Surveillance & Prevention, GPO Box 48, Brisbane, Queensland, 4001 Australia

²Institute of Health & Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, 60 Musk Avenue, Kelvin Grove, Queensland, 4059 Australia

³Intensive Care Unit, Princess Alexandra Hospital, 199 Ipswich Road, Woolloongabba, Queensland, 4102 Australia

⁴Infection Management Services, Princess Alexandra Hospital, 199 Ipswich Road, Woolloongabba, Queensland, 4102 Australia

⁵University of Queensland, Royal Brisbane & Women's Hospital, Butterfield Street, Herston, Queensland, 4029 Australia

author email corresponding author email

Critical Care 2009, 13:R35doi:10.1186/cc7744


Published:	11 March 2009

See related commentary by Safdar, http://ccforum.com/content/13/3/148

Abstract

Introduction

Some types of antimicrobial-coated central venous catheters (A-CVC) have been shown to be cost effective in preventing catheter-related bloodstream infection (CR-BSI). However, not all types have been evaluated, and there are concerns over the quality and usefulness of these earlier studies. There is uncertainty amongst clinicians over which, if any, A-CVCs to use. We re-evaluated the cost effectiveness of all commercially available A-CVCs for prevention of CR-BSI in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

Methods

We used a Markov decision model to compare the cost effectiveness of A-CVCs relative to uncoated catheters. Four catheter types were evaluated: minocycline and rifampicin (MR)-coated catheters, silver, platinum and carbon (SPC)-impregnated catheters, and two chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine-coated catheters; one coated on the external surface (CH/SSD (ext)) and the other coated on both surfaces (CH/SSD (int/ext)). The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained and the expected net monetary benefits were estimated for each. Uncertainty arising from data estimates, data quality and heterogeneity was explored in sensitivity analyses.

Results

The baseline analysis, with no consideration of uncertainty, indicated all four types of A-CVC were cost-saving relative to uncoated catheters. MR-coated catheters prevented 15 infections per 1,000 catheters and generated the greatest health benefits, 1.6 quality-adjusted life years, and cost savings (AUD $130,289). After considering uncertainty in the current evidence, the MR-coated catheters returned the highest incremental monetary net benefits of AUD $948 per catheter; however there was a 62% probability of error in this conclusion. Although the MR-coated catheters had the highest monetary net benefits across multiple scenarios, the decision was always associated with high uncertainty.

Conclusions

Current evidence suggests that the cost effectiveness of using A-CVCs within the ICU is highly uncertain. Policies to prevent CR-BSI amongst ICU patients should consider the cost effectiveness of competing interventions in the light of this uncertainty. Decision makers would do well to consider the current gaps in knowledge and the complexity of producing good quality evidence in this area.