Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22752150›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2012

The potential economic value of screening hospital admissions for Clostridium difficile.

S M Bartsch, S R Curry, L H Harrison, B Y Lee

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Isolation Precautions in the Inpatient Setting.Hospital medicine clinics · 2016
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Is fidaxomicin worth the cost? An economic analysis.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2013
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

S M BartschPublic Health Computational and Operations Research (PHICOR), University of Pittsburgh, 3520 Forbes Avenue, First Floor, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA. smm168@pitt.edu
S R Curry
L H Harrison
B Y Lee
University of Pittsburgh · USUniversity of Pittsburgh Medical Center · US

Funding

Training, Outreach & Diversity ComponentU54GM088491 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI LAKOSKI, JOAN M · 2009 to 2018
$16.7M
NIGMS NIH HHS 1U54GM088491-0109NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM088491
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Asymptomatic Clostridium difficile carriage has a prevalence reported as high as 51-85 %; with up to 84 % of incident hospital-acquired infections linked to carriers. Accurately identifying carriers may limit the spread of Clostridium difficile. Since new technology adoption depends heavily on its economic value, we developed an analytic simulation model to determine the cost-effectiveness screening hospital admissions for Clostridium difficile from the hospital and third party payer perspectives. Isolation precautions were applied to patients testing positive, preventing transmission. Sensitivity analyses varied Clostridium difficile colonization rate, infection probability among secondary cases, contact isolation compliance, and screening cost. Screening was cost-effective (i.e., incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] ≤ $50,000/QALY) for every scenario tested; all ICER values were ≤ $256/QALY. Screening was economically dominant (i.e., saved costs and provided health benefits) with a ≥10.3 % colonization rate and ≥5.88 % infection probability when contact isolation compliance was ≥25 % (hospital perspective). Under some conditions screening led to cost savings per case averted (range, $53-272). Clostridium difficile screening, coupled with isolation precautions, may be a cost-effective intervention to hospitals and third party payers, based on prevalence. Limiting Clostridium difficile transmission can reduce the number of infections, thereby reducing its economic burden to the healthcare system.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCarrier StateChildChild, PreschoolClostridioides difficileClostridium InfectionsCosts and Cost AnalysisDiagnostic Tests, RoutineFemaleHospitalsHumansInfantMale

Identifiers

PMID22752150
PMCPMC3562533
OpenAlexW2084303232

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.