Skip to main content
GutCited

Savings from the use of a probiotic formula in the prophylaxis of antibiotic-associated diarrhea.

Alvine Adrienne Kamdeu Fansi, Jason Robert Guertin, Jacques LeLorier
Other Journal of medical economics 2012 28 次引用
PubMed DOI
<\/script>\n
`; }, get iframeSnippet() { const domain = 'gutcited.com'; const params = 'pmid\u003D22023067'; return ``; }, get activeSnippet() { return this.method === 'script' ? this.scriptSnippet : this.iframeSnippet; }, copySnippet() { navigator.clipboard.writeText(this.activeSnippet).then(() => { this.copied = true; setTimeout(() => { this.copied = false; }, 2000); }); } }" @keydown.escape.window="open = false" @click.outside="open = false">

Embed This Widget

Style



      
      
    

Widget powered by . Free, no account required.

Study Design

研究类型
Randomized Controlled Trial
研究人群
None
持续时间
1.9 weeks
干预措施
Savings from the use of a probiotic formula in the prophylaxis of antibiotic-associated diarrhea. None
对照组
placebo
主要结局
diarrhea
效应方向
Mixed
偏倚风险
Moderate

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) and particularly Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) are the most common causes of healthcare associated infectious diarrhea. A double-blind, dose response, placebo-controlled trial of the probiotic formula (Bio-K+ Lactobacillus acidophilus CL1285 and Lactobacillus casei LBC80R formula) for prophylaxis of AAD and CDAD was published in 2010. The Bio-K+ Lactobacillus acidophilus CL1285 and Lactobacillus casei LBC80R formula is a registered trademark of Bio-K Plus International Inc. (Laval, Québec, Canada). Results indicated that the incidence of AAD and CDAD were lower for patients assigned to the probiotic formula compared with the placebo option. The present study aims to estimate the savings in direct medical costs that might result from the use of two different doses of the probiotic formula vs placebo. METHODS: A cost-consequence analysis was conducted to compare the two doses of the probiotic formula compared to placebo. The analysis was based upon published data and adjusted to the North American context. RESULTS: Economic analyses showed that the use of the probiotic formula would result in estimated mean per patients savings of US$1968 for the single dose and US$2661 for the double dose compared with the placebo option if used an average of 13 days by all patients at risk of developing AAD and CDAD. LIMITATIONS: Several key parameters considered within the economic model were not captured within the Gao et al. study. Numerous sensitivity analyses were conducted to address this issue. CONCLUSION: The use of the probiotic formula in prophylaxis of AAD and CDAD would lead to estimated savings in direct medical costs that would substantially offset its acquisition cost. Treating 1000 hospitalized patients on antibiotics with the double dose of the product compared to current practice would save a single payer system the sum of $2,661,218.

简要概述

The use of the probiotic formula in prophylaxis of AAD and CDAD would lead to estimated savings in direct medical costs that would substantially offset its acquisition cost.

Used In Evidence Reviews

Similar Papers