ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2019
Costs of hospital-acquired
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Epidemiology and Risk Factors of Clostridioides difficile Infections in Germany: A Health Claims Data Analysis.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2023Article
- Risk Factors of Patients With Diarrhea for HavingFrontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- [Disorder-related case groups for needs-based hospital care].Der Nervenarzt · 2020Article
- Modelling the annual NHS costs and outcomes attributable to healthcare-associated infections in England.BMJ open · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHospital-acquired infections have not only gained increasing attention clinically, but also methodologically, as a time-varying exposure. While methods to appropriately estimate extra length of stay (LOS) have been established and are increasingly used in the literature, proper estimation of cost figures has lagged behind.
methodsAnalysing the additional costs and reimbursements of
resultsWe find that CDI is associated with €9000 of extra costs, €7800 of higher reimbursements, and 6.4 days extra length of stay. Using a conventional method, which suffers from time-dependent bias, we derive estimates more than three times as high (€23,000, €8000, 21 days respectively). We discuss our method in the context of recent methodological advances in the estimation of the costs of hospital-acquired infections.
conclusionsCDI is associated with sizeable in-hospital costs. Neglecting the methodological particularities of hospital-acquired infections can however substantially bias results. As the data needed for an appropriate analysis are collected routinely in most hospitals, we recommend our approach as a feasible way for estimating the economic impact of time-varying adverse events during hospital stay.
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.