We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Cost-effectiveness comparison of sequential ofloxacin versus standard switch therapy.
Annals of Pharmacotherapy 1997 October
OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of sequential intravenous-to-oral ofloxacin versus intravenous-to-oral standard switch therapy for the treatment of patients with sepsis who are hospitalized with bacterial infections.
DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis from a provider perspective, including resources important to an integrated healthcare network, of a randomized, open-label, controlled, clinical trial.
SETTING: Millard Fillmore Health System, Buffalo, NY.
PATIENTS: Hospitalized adults requiring parenteral antibiotics for a complicated urinary tract infection, lower respiratory tract infection, or skin and soft tissue infection.
INTERVENTIONS: Sequential intravenous-to-oral ofloxacin or standard intravenous-to-oral switch antibiotics.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical outcomes and direct costs associated with hospitalization, primary physician services, specialist physician services, and outpatient care.
RESULTS: Eighty-two of 89 patients randomized into the two treatment groups were evaluable. Standard switch therapy failed with 12 patients versus 10 patients receiving ofloxacin. Complete economic data were available for 74 patients. Sequential ofloxacin therapy resulted in a 1-day-shorter antibiotic-related hospitalization without evidence of recurrent infection during the posttherapy follow-up evaluations. An average cost savings of $399 per patient was achieved in the sequential ofloxacin group. Although this difference did not attain statistical significance (probably due to the large variance), it is an economically significant finding. The cost-effectiveness ratios were $5735 per successful outcome for the standard switch therapy group versus $5126 per successful outcome in the sequential ofloxacin group.
CONCLUSIONS: Sequential ofloxacin was as effective and consistently less expensive than standard switch antibiotics in the initial evaluation and in the sensitivity analysis of room cost and drug acquisition cost. Standard switch therapy would have to be greater than 25% more effective than sequential ofloxacin therapy to change the economic decision.
DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis from a provider perspective, including resources important to an integrated healthcare network, of a randomized, open-label, controlled, clinical trial.
SETTING: Millard Fillmore Health System, Buffalo, NY.
PATIENTS: Hospitalized adults requiring parenteral antibiotics for a complicated urinary tract infection, lower respiratory tract infection, or skin and soft tissue infection.
INTERVENTIONS: Sequential intravenous-to-oral ofloxacin or standard intravenous-to-oral switch antibiotics.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical outcomes and direct costs associated with hospitalization, primary physician services, specialist physician services, and outpatient care.
RESULTS: Eighty-two of 89 patients randomized into the two treatment groups were evaluable. Standard switch therapy failed with 12 patients versus 10 patients receiving ofloxacin. Complete economic data were available for 74 patients. Sequential ofloxacin therapy resulted in a 1-day-shorter antibiotic-related hospitalization without evidence of recurrent infection during the posttherapy follow-up evaluations. An average cost savings of $399 per patient was achieved in the sequential ofloxacin group. Although this difference did not attain statistical significance (probably due to the large variance), it is an economically significant finding. The cost-effectiveness ratios were $5735 per successful outcome for the standard switch therapy group versus $5126 per successful outcome in the sequential ofloxacin group.
CONCLUSIONS: Sequential ofloxacin was as effective and consistently less expensive than standard switch antibiotics in the initial evaluation and in the sensitivity analysis of room cost and drug acquisition cost. Standard switch therapy would have to be greater than 25% more effective than sequential ofloxacin therapy to change the economic decision.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Clinical Pearls for Primary Care Providers and Gastroenterologists.Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2024 April
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app