4.5 Article

Cost-Effectiveness of Surveillance for Bloodstream Infections for Sepsis Management in Low-Resource Settings

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TROPICAL MEDICINE AND HYGIENE
Volume 93, Issue 4, Pages 850-860

Publisher

AMER SOC TROP MED & HYGIENE
DOI: 10.4269/ajtmh.15-0083

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, University of Otago
  2. U.S. National Institutes of Health-National Science Foundation [R01 TW009237]
  3. UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) [BB/J010367/1]
  4. UK BBSRC Zoonoses in Emerging Livestock Systems [BB/L017679, BB/L018926, BB/L018845]
  5. BBSRC [BB/J010367/1, BB/L018845/1, BB/L018926/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  6. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/L018926/1, BB/J010367/1, BB/L018845/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bacterial sepsis is a leading cause of mortality among febrile patients in low- and middle-income countries, but blood culture services are not widely available. Consequently, empiric antimicrobial management of suspected bloodstream infection is based on generic guidelines that are rarely informed by local data on etiology and patterns of antimicrobial resistance. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of surveillance for bloodstream infections to inform empiric management of suspected sepsis in low-resource areas, we compared costs and outcomes of generic antimicrobial management with management informed by local data on etiology and patterns of antimicrobial resistance. We applied a decision tree model to a hypothetical population of febrile patients presenting at the district hospital level in Africa. We found that the evidence-based regimen saved 534 more lives per 100,000 patients at an additional cost of $25.35 per patient, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $4,739. This ratio compares favorably to standard cost-effectiveness thresholds, but should ultimately be compared with other policy-relevant alternatives to determine whether routine surveillance for bloodstream infections is a cost-effective strategy in the African context.

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