ReviewPharmacoEconomics1996
Treatment of urinary tract infection. Clinical and economic considerations.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ofloxacin. A reappraisal of its use in the management of genitourinary tract infections.Drugs · 1998Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The epidemiology, clinical manifestations, natural history and management of urinary tract infection (UTI) are briefly reviewed as background to the economic considerations of diagnosis and treatment. Specific pharmacoeconomic analyses, such as cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses, of UTI are not available. Analysis of the direct costs of diagnosis and treatment reveal that laboratory costs comprise the largest proportion, followed by physician consultation and pharmaceutical costs, respectively. Antimicrobial treatment has focused on acquisition cost without due regard to costs associated with method of delivery (especially with parenteral therapy), drug monitoring, complications, suboptimal therapy, drug wastage and waste disposal. These factors indicate a preference for ambulatory therapy using oral antimicrobials rather than institutional care using parenteral agents. Indirect costs, such as lost work time and quality-of-life factors, are not readily available. Evidence suggests that nosocomial UTIs add significantly to hospital costs. Studies citing the cost effectiveness of infection control programmes have often lacked detail and may have accrued benefits to the service without apportioning full costs. Future research directions include analysis of laboratory economics in relation to the clinical encounter, improved analysis of the utility and total costs of newer antimicrobials, quantifying home versus hospital treatment and improved costing of infection control programmes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.