Trial reportThe Lancet. Global health2024
Cost-effectiveness of a short-course antibiotic treatment strategy for the treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia: an economic analysis of the REGARD-VAP trial.
Trial report in The Lancet. Global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hospital Cost Components and Predictors inTropical medicine and infectious disease · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe REGARD-VAP trial showed that individualised shortened antibiotic therapy was non-inferior to usual care for mortality and pneumonia recurrence in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of an individualised shortened antibiotic therapy approach in this planned economic analysis.
methodsREGARD-VAP was a phase 4, multicentre, open-label, randomised trial to assess a short-course antibiotic treatment strategy for treatment of VAP. In this planned economic analysis, we fitted a decision tree with data from the REGARD-VAP trial to estimate the cost-effectiveness of individualised short-course therapy for VAP, compared to usual care from the health system perspective, in Nepal, Singapore, and Thailand. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and incremental net monetary benefits with 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) were reported against relevant willingness-to-pay thresholds. Parameter uncertainties were evaluated using scenario analyses. A value of information analysis was conducted.
findingsAdopting individualised short-course therapy was cost-effective for Nepal (ICER=US$1086; percentage cost-effectiveness=50·3%), Singapore (ICER=-$6069; percentage cost-effectiveness=55·2%), and Thailand (ICER=$263; percentage cost-effectiveness=60·5%). The associated incremental net monetary benefits were $41 (95% UI -2308 to 2390) in Nepal, $5156 (-45 805 to 56 117) in Singapore, and $804 (-6245 to 7852) in Thailand. Value of information analysis showed that reducing uncertainties for mortality probabilities, bed-day costs, and variable costs were valuable for decision making.
interpretationWe found that an individualised short-course antibiotics strategy in patients with VAP is likely to be cost-effective in high-income, middle-income, and low-income settings, although with evident uncertainty. Considered alongside the positive externalities of reduced antimicrobial use, our findings foster confidence in policy makers contemplating adoption of short-course antibiotics.
fundingUK Medical Research Council, Singapore National Medical Research Council, and Wellcome Trust.
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.