Trial reportPharmacoEconomics1997
Cost-effectiveness of abbreviating the duration of intravenous antibacterial therapy with oral fluoroquinolones.
Trial report in PharmacoEconomics, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost effectiveness of ciprofloxacin plus metronidazole versus imipenem-cilastatin in the treatment of intra-abdominal infections.PharmacoEconomics · 1999Trial
- Estimated greenhouse gas emissions associated with unnecessary intravenous antimicrobials administered in the hospital setting.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2025Article
- Assessment of Intravenous Antibiotics to Peroral Antibiotics Conversion Practice and Its Associated Factor at University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital: Prospective Observational Study.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2022Article
- Effects of orally administered Augmentin on glutamate transporter 1, cystine-glutamate exchanger expression and ethanol intake in alcohol-preferring rats.Behavioural brain research · 2017Article
- Switch over from intravenous to oral therapy: A concise overview.Journal of pharmacology & pharmacotherapeutics · 2014Review
- Implementation of guidelines for sequential therapy with fluoroquinolones in a Belgian hospital.Pharmacy world & science : PWS · 2010Article
- Efficacy of pefloxacin in the treatment of patients with acute infectious diarrhoea.Clinical drug investigation · 2003Article
- Cost effectiveness of cephalosporin monotherapy and aminoglycoside/ureidopenicillin combination therapy. For the treatment of febrile episodes in neutropenic patients.PharmacoEconomics · 2000Article
- Basis of anti-infective therapy: pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic criteria and methodology for dual dosage individualisation.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 1999Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Comprehensive economic analyses should include outpatient as well as inpatient resources. A healthcare system that includes both inpatient and outpatient care, such as prescriptions, physician care, laboratory tests and multiple other items, has been termed an Integrated Healthcare Network (IHN). Thus, cost-effectiveness analyses from the perspective of an IHN are necessary. We report a cost-effectiveness analysis from an IHN perspective on 187 evaluable hospitalised patients with serious infection who participated in randomised clinical trials that evaluated either: (i) standard regimens of intravenous (i.v.) antibacterial therapy, usually followed by oral antibacterial therapy; or (ii) an abbreviated regimen of intravenous antibacterials for 2 to 4 days, followed by either oral ciprofloxacin or oral enoxacin as early switch therapy. Clinical success rates were similar for the 2 treatment groups. The median number of days of in-hospital antibacterial treatment was 11 for standard i.v. therapy and 10 for switch therapy. Adverse events occurred in 33% of the standard i.v. therapy group and in 50% of the switch therapy group. Sensitivity analysis of drug price and hospital bed cost showed that switch therapy was consistently more cost effective than standard i.v. therapy. Standard i.v. therapy would have to be 10% more effective than switch therapy to change the economic decision. In this analysis, switch therapy was a cost-effective treatment with no demonstrated change in efficacy compared with standard i.v. therapy.
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.