4.5 Article

The impact of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa on clinical and economic outcomes in a Chinese tertiary care hospital: A propensity score-matched analysis

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INFECTION CONTROL
Volume 47, Issue 6, Pages 677-682

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2018.10.025

Keywords

Carbapenem resistance; Pseudomonas aeruginosa; Outcome; Costs; Propensity score; Infection control

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: This study aimed to estimate the impact of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPA) on clinical and economic outcomes in a Chinese tertiary care hospital. Methods: Patients were assigned to a carbapenem-susceptible P aeruginosa group or to a CRPA group and matched using propensity score matching. In-hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS), LOS after culture, total hospital costs, daily hospital cost, and 30-day readmission were comparatively analyzed. Subgroup analysis was performed to determine the associations between the subgrouping factors and in-hospital mortality in patients with CRPA isolates. Results: Within the propensity-matched cohort, in-hospital mortality (12.6% vs 7.8%; P = .044), LOS (median 29.0 vs 25.5 days; P = .026), LOS after culture (median 18.5 vs 14.0 days; P = .029), total hospital costs (median $6,082.0 vs $4,9542; P = .015), and daily hospital cost (median $236.1 vs $223.6; P = .045) were significantly higher in CRPA patients than in carbapenem-susceptible P aeruginosa patients. Subgroup analysis revealed a significant interaction between CRPA and age (P = .009). Conclusion: Prevention and control of CRPA among hospitalized patients, especially among those over the age of 65 years, is a good measurement for the reduction of mortality and medical costs derived from CRPA infection or colonization. (C) 2018 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available