Objective: Infection following cochlear implantation is medically and economically devastating. The cost-effectiveness (CE) of colonization screening and decolonization for infection prophylaxis in cochlear implantation has not been examined.
Study Design: An analytic observational study of data collected from purchasing records and the literature.
Methods: Costs of colonization screening and decolonization were acquired from purchasing records and the literature. Infection rates after cochlear implantation and average total costs for evaluation and treatment were obtained from a review of the literature. A break-even analysis was performed to determine the required absolute risk reduction (ARR) in infection rate to make colonization screening or decolonization CE.
Results: Nasal screening ($144.07) is CE if the initial infection rate (1.7%) had an ARR of 0.60%. Decolonization with 2% intranasal mupirocin ointment ($5.09) was CE (ARR, 0.02%). A combined decolonization technique (2% intranasal mupirocin ointment, chlorhexidine wipes, chlorhexidine shower, and prophylactic vancomycin: $37.57) was CE (ARR, 0.16%). Varying infection rate as high as 15% demonstrated that CE did not change by maintaining an ARR of 0.16%. CE of the most expensive decolonization protocol was enhanced as the cost of infection treatment increased, with an ARR of 0.03% at $125,000.
Conclusions: Prophylactic decolonization techniques can be CE for preventing infection following cochlear implantation. Decolonization with mupirocin is economically justified if it prevents at least 1 infection out of 5000 implants. colonization screening needed high reductions in infection rate to be CE.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6684140 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2473974X19866391 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!