Cost-effectiveness analysis of low versus high dose colistin in the treatment of multi-drug resistant pneumonia in Saudi Arabia
- 181 Downloads
Background Gram negative pathogens are increasingly resistant to commonly used first line antibiotics and colistin is in most cases the only medicine available. There is very limited information available comparing the effectiveness and costs of low versus high dose colistin with studies showing efficacy with both doses and with variable levels of adverse effects. The absence of a definite dosing strategy makes a model to compare low dose and high dose colistin invaluable in making decisions regarding the appropriate use of colistin. Objective This study was designed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of low versus high dose colistin in the treatment of Pneumonia caused by colistin-only sensitive gram negative bacteria from the perspective of a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia. Setting 300-bed tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia. Method A retrospective review was conducted to compare the costs and outcomes of treatment of pneumonia with low versus high dose colistin. The model followed an average patient from initiation of treatment until clinical cure or failure. Main outcome measures The main outcomes were cure, nephrotoxicity, total direct costs per episode, cost per additional cure and cost per nephrotoxicity avoided. Results There was no significant difference between high and low dose colistin with regards to clinical cure (30% vs. 21%; p = 0.292). Significantly more patients experienced nephrotoxicity with high versus low dose colistin (30% vs. 8%; p = 0.004). With low dose colistin the incremental costs per nephrotoxicity avoided was SAR—3056.28. One-way sensitivity analyses did not change the overall results. Conclusion Low dose was not inferior to high dose colistin in terms of clinical cure and had a lower incidence of nephrotoxicity resulting in significant cost avoidance.
KeywordsColistin Cost effectiveness Efficacy Gram negative Multi drug resistant Pneumonia Saudi Arabia
We thank Ms. Analyn Crisostomo (B.Pharm) for collecting data on some study variables and Ms. Iman Moustafa (M.Pharm) for assistance with layout and proof reading.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
- 1.Focaccia R, Gomes Da Conceicao OJ. Pneumonia hospitalar. Rev Bras Med. 1994;51(SPEC. ISS.):95–8.Google Scholar
- 5.Navoa-Ng JA, Berba R, Galapia YA, Rosenthal VD, Villanueva VD, Tolentino MCV, et al. Device-associated infections rates in adult, pediatric, and neonatal intensive care units of hospitals in the Philippines: International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC) findings. Am J Infect Control. 2011;39(7):548–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Scott II RD. The direct medical costs of healthcare-associated infections in U.S. hospitals and the benefits of prevention. CDC; 2009.Google Scholar