ArticleInfectious diseases and therapy2025
An Economic Model to Assess the Cost Impact of Using Xpert Carba-R to Screen Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales in Comparison with Standard of Care, in a National Health Service Setting.
Article in Infectious diseases and therapy, 2025. 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.
- Molecular insights into antimicrobial resistance in human bacterial pathogens: mechanisms, resistance genes, and translational diagnostic applications.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Evaluation of sample pooling using Xpert Carba-R and XpertMicrobiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Rapid Identification of Carbapenemase Genes Directly from Blood Culture Samples.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Analytical performance of the Xpert Carba-R assay for direct detection of carbapenemase genes in respiratory specimens from hospitalized patients: a multicenter evaluation in China.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCarbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE) are bacteria that produce carbapenemases, enzymes that destroy carbapenem antibiotics and result in carbapenem resistance. Early identification of individuals who have been colonised or infected is important to correctly implement infection prevention and control procedures. Chromogenic media culture is traditionally the most common method of screening for high-risk patients. However, there is a long wait for results, which has substantial cost and operational implications. Xpert Carba-R is a rapid molecular test that provides CPE screening results in 50 min. This study aimed to assess the cost impact of high-risk CPE screening with Xpert Carba-R compared with media culture.
methodsAn economic model was developed using a probabilistic cost-comparison approach to estimate the costs associated with Xpert Carba-R, from a National Health Service and personal social services perspective. The model cohort was individuals at high risk of CPE colonisation and used an 8.30-day mean time horizon for all patients to cover hospitalisation time, with an extra 5.80 days added for patients that were truly colonised to cover the time they would spend in isolation (14.10-day time horizon overall). Deterministic sensitivity analysis and scenario analysis were used to determine the robustness of the findings.
resultsThe model found that Xpert Carba-R is cost saving compared with media culture, with incremental cost savings of £818.28 per person. Despite greater technology costs, there are cost savings associated with preventing unnecessary isolation.
conclusionThe analysis found Xpert Carba-R to be cost saving compared with media culture for CPE screening in high-risk patients. The model did not explore onwards transmission or the opportunity cost of releasing isolation spaces, so the cost savings are likely to be far greater than those demonstrated in this study.
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.