ArticleHealth affairs (Project Hope)2014
CDC central-line bloodstream infection prevention efforts produced net benefits of at least $640 Million during 1990-2008.
Article in Health affairs (Project Hope), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measuring the Direct Medical Costs of Hospital-Onset Infections Using an Analogy Costing Framework.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Article
- Article
- Value of Public Health Funding in Preventing Hospital Bloodstream Infections in the United States.American journal of public health · 2017Article
- Fifteen years after To Err is Human: a success story to learn from.BMJ quality & safety · 2016Article
- The Likelihood of Hospital Readmission Among Patients With Hospital-Onset Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections.Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2015Article
- Eliminating Infections in the ICU: CLABSI.Current infectious disease reports · 2015Article
- 20 Years of Public Health Economics and Decision Sciences at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: The CDC Steven M. Teutsch Prevention Effectiveness Fellowship, 1995-2015.Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMPArticle
- Understanding the Economic Impact of Health Care-Associated Infections: A Cost Perspective Analysis.Journal of infusion nursing : the official publication of the Infusion Nurses SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The prevention of central line-associated bloodstream infections in patients in hospital critical care units has been a target of efforts by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) since the 1960s. We developed a historical economic model to measure the net economic benefits of preventing these infections in Medicare and Medicaid patients in critical care units for the period 1990-2008-a time when reductions attributable to federal investment resulted primarily from CDC efforts-using the cost perspective of the federal government as a third-party payer. The estimated net economic benefits ranged from $640 million to $1.8 billion, with the corresponding net benefits per case averted ranging from $15,780 to $24,391. The per dollar rate of return on the CDC's investments ranged from $3.88 to $23.85. These findings suggest that investments in CDC programs targeting other health care-associated infections also have the potential to produce savings by lowering Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements.
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.