disclosure statement
DESCRIPTION
Economic and medical adverse effects of a national policy to control the spread of highly-resistant micro-organisms. G Birgand a , M Schwarzinger b , A Perozziello c , C Pelat b , L Armand-Lefevre, E Ruppé d , JC Buzzi c , A Andremont d , Y Yazdanpanah b , JC Lucet a - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
1
Economic and medicaladverse effects of a national policy
to control the spread of highly-resistant micro-organisms.
G Birgand a, M Schwarzinger b, A Perozziello c, C Pelat b, L Armand-Lefevre, E Ruppé d, JC Buzzi c, A Andremont d , Y Yazdanpanah b, JC Lucet a
a Infection control unit, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Paris, Franceb ATIP-Avenir, Inserm U738, Paris, France;
c Medical Infomation Systems Program (PMSI), Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Paris, France; d Bacteriology laboratory, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Paris, France
Disclosure statement
• Financial support: none
• Conflict of interest:– Pfizer: Travel grant for the ICAAC 2011
G. Birgand
ECCMID Berlin 20132
3
IntroductionEpidemiological context
G. Birgand
GRE CPE
E.Faecium VR
EARSS 2011
Kp Carba-R
EARSS 2011
ECCMID Berlin 2013
4
Introduction French National Recommandations
Patients detected colonised with GRE or CPE:
1. Single room + contact precautions for carriers and contact patients along the entire hospital stay
2. Cohorting of carriers and contact patients in 2 different dedicated areas with dedicated staff 24/7
3. Interruption of transfers of carriers and contact patients + interruption of new admissions
4. Repeated rectal sampling of contact patients: D0, D7, D15
G. Birgand
ECCMID Berlin 2013
5
Introduction Potential consequences of guidelines
• Medical impact:‒ Unintended deleterious adverse effects for patients ?
‒ Disruption for the ward‒ Delays in patient’s care and transfer
• Economical impact:‒ Lost income due to interruption of transfers and
admissions (French daily incomes for 1 hospital day: € 300-400 in medical units to € 1700 - 2000 in ICU)
‒ Cost of lab techniques and contact precautions‒ Cost of additional staff for cohorting
G. Birgand
ECCMID Berlin 2013
6
ObjectivesG. Birgand
From 01/2009 to 06/2012 (3.5 years)in a 1000-bed University Hospital
6
Characteristics of hospital stays
The additional hospital costs
Patients colonised with GRE or CPE
€Length of stay
ECCMID Berlin 2013
MethodsStudy design
G. Birgand
7
• Outcomes: • Length of hospital stay and overall hospital cost
• Retrospective data collection:
• Clinical, microbiological and hospital stay characteristics • Estimated costs of inpatient care based on reimbursement
rates of the DRG (national yearly survey, 2011)• Statistical analysis: • Univariate and multivariate ANOVA (SAS and Stata v10)
ControlsPatient never identified as colonized with GRE or CPE
CasesPatient colonised or infected
with GRE or CPE
Matching criteria: gender, ward, period of hospitalisation (n-1), Age, diagnosis-related group (DRG)
8
MethodsStudy population
G. Birgand
107 surviving patients
26 cases colonised
81 Controls never identified
14 GRE 12 CPE1 1 18 6
10 vanA 4 vanB 9 OXA-48 2 KPC 1 NDM-1
ECCMID Berlin 2013
37 Pts identified colonised during the study period:•4 death•7 still hospitalised
9
G. Birgand
ResultsDescription of cases
Characteristics GRE Ptsn= 14 (%)
CPE Ptsn= 12 (%)
n (%)N= 26
Patients from an episode with secondary cases 8 (57) 3 (25) 11 (42)
Time admission => positive culture, d (IQR) 10 (7-20) 13 (5-21) 11 (7-20)
In ICU at time of positive result 3 (21) 3 (25) 6 (23)
Infection with HDRB 2 (14) 1 (8) 3 (12)
Year of first HDRB identification
2009 2 (14) 1 (8) 3 (12)
2010 3 (21) 2 (17) 5 (19)
2011 5 (36) 5 (42) 10 (38)
2012 (6 months) 4 (29) 4 (33) 8 (31)
Age, median (IQR) 65 (57-77) 65 (56-77) 0.84Female 11 (42) 33 (41) 0.89Diagnosis-related group 1.00
Respiratory diseases 9 (35) 28 (35)Diabetes 3 (12) 8 (10)Vascular diseases 4 (15) 20 (24)Infectious diseases 3 (11) 9 (11)Others 7 (27) 16 (20)
Charlson score, median (IQR) 6 (4-7) 4 (3-6) 0.1Mc Cabe score 0.55
0 7 (27) 28 (36)1 17 (65) 42 (53)2 2 (8) 9 (11)
Ward at the time of identification 0.73 ICU 5 (19) 15 (19)Medical unit 15 (58) 53 (65)Surgical unit 6 (23) 13 (16)
ResultsUnivariate analysis (1)
G. Birgand
Characteristics CasesN= 26 (%)
ControlsN= 81 (%)
P
10
Median length of stay 28 (12-94) 11 (8-18) <0.01
Ward at hospital discharge 0,05Intensive care unit 0 0Surgical ward 9 (35) 27 (33)Medical ward 14 (54) 53 (65)Rehabilitation 3 (12) 1 (1)
Destination at dischargeHome 23 (88) 68 (84) 0.57Transfer 3 (12) 13 (16)
Health insurance beneficiaries 18 (69) 67 (83) 0.32
Mean cost of hospitalisation, € (sd) 15,830 (4,320) 8,919 (2,447) <0.01
ResultsUnivariate analysis (2)
G. Birgand
Characteristics CasesN= 26
ControlsN= 81
P
11
ResultsMultivariate analysis
G. Birgand
Characteristics Colonised Patients Patients never identified as colonised
Mean cost, € (95%CI) 18,010 (14,561 – 21,469) 11,029 (8,732 – 13,325)
• Final multivariate mixed models of ANOVA:
Characteristics Colonised Patients Patients never identified as colonised
Mean length of stay, days (95%CI) 43 (33 – 54) 21 (14 – 27)
Excess of length of stay = 22 days (12 - 34)
Extra cost = 6,981€ (3,377 – 10,585)
ECCMID Berlin 2013
12
13
Discussion - Conclusion• The impact of stringent measures to control HDRB on
hospital stays characteristics was estimated to: – 22 days (12-34) of mean excess LOS per Pt– 6,981€ (3,377 – 10,585) of mean extra costs per Pt
• Strengths of this study:‒ Matching on patients comorbidity and DRG
Most costs are attributable to GRE or CPE
• Limits of this study:‒ Single center study‒ Costs based on DRG and not individual data.
• Perspectives:– Evaluation on a larger population at a multicenter level
G. Birgand
14
Thank you for your attention