ArticlePharmacy world & science : PWS2008
Vancomycin vs teicoplanin in the treatment of Gram-positive infections: a pharmacoeconomic analysis in a Turkish University Hospital.
Article in Pharmacy world & science : PWS, 2008. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Teicoplanin inhibits Ebola pseudovirus infection in cell culture.Antiviral research · 2016Article
- Inhibition of hepatitis C virus replication by semi-synthetic derivatives of glycopeptide antibiotics.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to estimate and compare the costs of vancomycin and teicoplanin in the treatment of Gram-positive hospital infections in Turkey using a cost minimisation analysis.
settingHacettepe University Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
methodThe health-care provider's perspective was considered within formal pharmacoeconomic assessment methodology. The records of 76 patients who had been hospitalised and treated for Gram-positive infections at Hacettepe University Hospital between 16 July 2003 and 22 November 2003 were retrospectively evaluated to obtain individual data on resources and associated costs.
main outcome measureFrom a cost minimisation perspective, hospital directors may consider teicoplanin to be a relevant option in addition to vancomycin.
resultThe estimated mean treatment cost per patient was 1,780 TRY (1,101 EUR) for teicoplanin and 1,429 TRY (884 EUR) for vancomycin, with statistical analysis failing to reveal any significant difference between the two drugs in terms of these total costs (p = 0.33). This cost minimisation analysis shows that the average costs of vancomycin and teicoplanin per patient observed did not differ significantly.
conclusionOther potential advantages of one drug over the other, as reported by other authors, such as differing safety profiles or advantages in administration, may ultimately decide which is preferred.
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.