ArticleBMJ open2014
Cost-effectiveness of a quality improvement programme to reduce central line-associated bloodstream infections in intensive care units in the USA.
Article in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Economic Evaluation of Quality Improvement Interventions for Bloodstream Infections Related to Central Catheters: A Systematic Review.JAMA internal medicine · 2016Pooled it
- Economic Evaluation of a Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infection Prevention Program in Nursing Homes.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2018Trial
- Article
- Predictors of Short-Term Readmission After Pancreaticoduodenectomy.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2018Article
- Association Between Time to Rehabilitation and Outcomes After Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2016Article
- Fifteen years after To Err is Human: a success story to learn from.BMJ quality & safety · 2016Article
- Bloodstream infections in the Intensive Care Unit.Virulence · 2016Review
- Physician Motivation: Listening to What Pay-for-Performance Programs and Quality Improvement Collaboratives Are Telling Us.Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety · 2015Article
- A Cautionary Tale on the Central Venous Catheter: Medical Note for Oral Physicians.The Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS · 2015Article
- Eliminating Infections in the ICU: CLABSI.Current infectious disease reports · 2015Article
- Disinfection of Needleless Connector Hubs: Clinical Evidence Systematic Review.Nursing research and practice · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of a multifaceted quality improvement programme focused on reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections in intensive care units.
designCost-effectiveness analysis using a decision tree model to compare programme to non-programme intensive care units.
settingUSA. POPULATION: Adult patients in the intensive care unit. COSTS: Economic costs of the programme and of central line-associated bloodstream infections were estimated from the perspective of the hospital and presented in 2013 US dollars.
main outcome measuresCentral line-associated bloodstream infections prevented, deaths averted due to central line-associated bloodstream infections prevented, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed.
resultsCompared with current practice, the programme is strongly dominant and reduces bloodstream infections and deaths at no additional cost. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that there was an almost 80% probability that the programme reduces bloodstream infections and the infections' economic costs to hospitals. The opportunity cost of a bloodstream infection to a hospital was the most important model parameter in these analyses.
conclusionsThis multifaceted quality improvement programme, as it is currently implemented by hospitals on an increasingly large scale in the USA, likely reduces the economic costs of central line-associated bloodstream infections for US hospitals. Awareness among hospitals about the programme's benefits should enhance implementation. The programme's implementation has the potential to substantially reduce morbidity, mortality and economic costs associated with central line-associated bloodstream infections.
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.