Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T08:00:12.418Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Silver-Coated Endotracheal Tube to Reduce the Incidence of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Andrew F. Shorr ,
Marya D. Zilberberg  and
Marin Kollef
Andrew F. Shorr*
Affiliation:
Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC
Marya D. Zilberberg
Affiliation:
EviMed Research Group, LLC, Goshen, MA
Marin Kollef
Affiliation:
Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
*
Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine Service, Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC 20010 ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective.

To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of the economic outcomes of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) prevention associated with silver-coated endotracheal tubes versus uncoated endotracheal tubes.

Design.

We used a simple decision model based on a hypothetical 1,000-patient cohort intubated with silver-coated or uncoated endotracheal tubes. The primary end point was marginal hospital savings per case of VAP prevented (savings from using silver-coated endotracheal tubes minus acquisition cost divided by number of VAP cases prevented).

Methods.

We followed each branch of the decision model to VAP or no VAP and conducted Monte Carlo simulations and sensitivity analyses. Inputs for VAP incidence, relative risk reduction, and hospital costs were derived from publicly available sources. Relative risk reduction was derived from the pivotal study of the silver-coated endotracheal tube.

Results.

In the base-case analysis, we reduced the pivotal study relative risk in incidence of microbiologically confirmed VAP in patients intubated ≥24 hours from 35.9% to 24%. Thus, 23 of 97 expected cases of VAP could be prevented with silver-coated endotracheal tubes. The savings per case of VAP prevented was $12,840 in the base case, with assumed marginal VAP cost of $16,620 and costs of $90.00 for coated and $2.00 for uncoated endotracheal tubes. Estimates were most sensitive to assumptions regarding VAP cost and relative risk reduction with silver-coated endotracheal tubes. Nonetheless, in multivariate sensitivity analyses, the silver-coated endotracheal tubes yielded persistent savings (95% confidence interval, $9,630-$16,356) per case of VAP prevented. With other base-case inputs held constant, breakeven cost for silver-coated endotracheal tubes was $388.

Conclusions.

The silver-coated endotracheal tube represents a strategy for preventing VAP that may yield hospital savings.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 30 , Issue 8 , August 2009 , pp. 759 - 763
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Edwards, JR, Peterson, KD, Andrus, ML, et al.National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) report, data summary for 2006, issued June 2007. Am J Infect Control 2007;35:290–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Relio, J, Ollendorf, DA, Oster, G, et al.Epidemiology and outcomes of ventilator-associated pneumonia in a large US database. Chest 2002;122:2115–2121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Hugonnet, S, Eggimann, P, Borst, F, Maricot, P, Chevrolet, JC, Pittet, D. Impact of ventilator-associated pneumonia on resource utilization and patient outcome. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2004;25:1090–1096.Google Scholar
4.Safdar, N, Dezfulian, C, Collard, HR, Saint, S. Clinical and economic consequences of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a systematic review. Crif Care Med 2005;33:2184–2193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Warren, DK, Shukla, SJ, Olsen, MA, et al.Outcome and attributable cost of ventilator-associated pneumonia among intensive care unit patients in a suburban medical center. Crit Care Med 2003;31:1312–1317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Anderson, DJ, Kirkland, KB, Kaye, KS, et al.Underresourced hospital infection control and prevention programs: penny wise, pound foolish? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2007;28:767–773.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Petering, HG. Pharmacology and toxicology of heavy metals: silver. Pharmacol Ther 1976;1:127–130.Google Scholar
8.Ahearn, DG, Grace, DT, Jennings, MJ, et al.Effects of hydrogel/silver coatings on in vitro adhesion to catheters of bacteria associated with urinary tract infections. Curr Microbiol 2000;41:120–125.Google Scholar
9.Gabriel, MM, Sawant, AD, Simmons, RB, Ahearn, DG. Effects of silver on adherence of bacteria to urinary catheters: in vitro studies. Curr Microbiol 1995;30:17–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Berra, L, De Marchi, L, Yu, ZX, Laquerriere, P, Baccarelli, A, Kolobow, T. Endotracheal tubes coated with antiseptics decrease bacterial colonization of the ventilator circuits, lungs, and endotracheal tube. Anesthesiology 2004;100:1446–1456.Google Scholar
11.Chandra, J, Patel, JD, Li, J, et al.Modification of surface properties of biomaterials influences the ability of Candida albicans to form biofilms. Appi Environ Miaobiol 2005;71:8795–8801.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Cunliffe, D, Smart, CA, Alexander, C, Vulfson, EN. Bacterial adhesion at synthetic surfaces. Appi Environ Microbiol 1999;65:4995–5002.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Patel, JD, Ebert, M, Ward, R, Anderson, JM. S. epidermidis biofilm formation: effects of biomaterial surface chemistry and serum proteins. J Biomed Mater Res A 2007;80:742–751.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Tebbs, SE, Elliott, TS. Modification of central venous catheter polymers to prevent in vitro microbial colonisation. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1994;13:111–117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Kollef, MH, Afessa, B, Anzueto, A, et al.Silver-coated endotracheal tubes and incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia: the NASCENT randomized trial. JAMA 2008;300:805–814.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Weinstein, MC, Siegel, JE, Gold, MR, Kamlet, MS, Russell, LB. Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA 1996;276:1253–1258.Google Scholar
17.Bureau of Labor Statistics of the US Department of Labor. Consumer Price Index. Available at: http://www.bls.gov/data. Accessed August 10, 2007.Google Scholar
18.Klompas, M, Platt, R. Ventilator-associated pneumonia—the wrong quality measure for benchmarking. Ann Intern Med 2007;147:803–805.Google Scholar
19.Shorr, AF, O'Malley, PG. Continuous subglottic suctioning for the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia: potential economic implications. Chest 2001;119:228–235.Google Scholar
20.Lai, KK, Baker, SP, Fontecchio, SA. Impact of a program of intensive surveillance and interventions targeting ventilated patients in the reduction of ventilator-associated pneumonia and its cost-effectiveness. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2003;24:859–863.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21.van Nieuwenhoven, CA, Buskens, E, Bergmans, DC, van Tiel, FH, Ramsay, G, Bonten, MJ. Oral decontamination is cost-saving in the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia in intensive care units. Crit Care Med 2004;32:126–130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Craven, DE. Preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia in adults: sowing seeds of change. Chest 2006;130:251–260.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Babcock, HM, Zack, JE, Garrison, T, et al.An educational intervention to reduce ventilator-associated pneumonia in an integrated health system: a comparison of effects. Chest 2004;125:2224–2231.Google Scholar
24.Zack, JE, Garrison, T, Trovilhon, E, et al.Effect of an education program aimed at reducing the occurrence of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Crif Care Med 2002;30:2407–2412.Google Scholar
25.Needleman, J, Buerhaus, P, Mattke, S, Stewart, M, Zelevinsky, K. Nurse-staffing levels and the quality of care in hospitals. N Engl J Med 2002;346:1715–1722.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26.Kollef, MH. The prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia. N Engl J Med 1999;340:627–634.Google Scholar
27.Relio, J, Lorente, C, Bodi, M, Diaz, E, Ricart, M, Kollef, MH. Why do physicians not follow evidence-based guidelines for preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia? a survey based on the opinions of an international panel of intensivists. Chest 2002;122:656–661.Google Scholar
28.Ricart, M, Lorente, C, Diaz, E, Kollef, MH, Relio, J. Nursing adherence with evidence-based guidelines for preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia. Crit Care Med 2003;31:2693–2696.Google Scholar
29.Esteban, A, Anzueto, A, Alia, I, et al.How is mechanical ventilation employed in the intensive care unit? an international utilization review. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;161:1450–1458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Esteban, A, Anzueto, A, Frutos, F, et al.Characteristics and outcomes in adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation: a 28-day international study. JAMA 2002;287:345–355.Google Scholar
31.Freeman, BD, Borecki, IB, Coopersmith, CM, Buchman, TG. Relationship between tracheostomy timing and duration of mechanical ventilation in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med 2005;33:2513–2520.Google Scholar