ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2026
Optimizing antibiotic prophylaxis for type III open fractures in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundSurgical site infections (SSI) remain a significant concern following Type III open fractures. Recent studies have suggested that narrow-spectrum antibiotics like cefazolin (CEZ) may offer comparable efficacy to broader-spectrum combinations in preventing SSI, with potential cost benefits. However, the cost-effectiveness of different prophylactic regimens in Type III open fractures in China has not been comprehensively evaluated.
methodsA decision-tree model was constructed for a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 adult patients with Type III open fractures in the Chinese healthcare setting. Six prophylactic antibiotic regimens were compared: cefazolin (CEZ), cefazolin + aminoglycosides (CEZ + AG), piperacillin/tazobactam (PIPC/TAZ), cefotaxime (CTX), ampicillin/sulbactam (ABPC/SBT) and ceftriaxone (CTRX). Transition probabilities and utility values were derived from published clinical studies, while cost data were obtained from the Chinese Volume-Based Procurement (VBP) policy for drug pricing, along with additional expenses incurred due to SSI. Both one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were conducted to assess the robustness of the findings against variations in key parameters.
resultsFrom the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, CEZ was identified as the dominant strategy (lowest cost and highest utility). With a total cost of 1,272.47 CNY and a total utility of 0.3425 QALYs, CEZ yielded the highest net monetary benefit (NMB) of 31,524.54 CNY at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 95,749 CNY/QALY (1×GDP per capita). In contrast, all other regimens were found to be dominated (associated with higher costs and lower QALYs), resulting in negative incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) relative to CEZ. Among these, CTRX was the least efficient strategy, incurring the highest cost (3,864.94 CNY) while yielding the lowest total utility (0.3262 QALYs). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings, reinforcing CEZ as the dominant and most cost-effective option.
conclusionsThis study highlights the cost-effectiveness advantage of CEZ in preventing SSI following Type III open fractures in China. CEZ is the most cost-effective option overall, demonstrating a clear advantage over all other regimens. These findings provide essential insights for guiding antibiotic selection and optimizing healthcare resource allocation in the prevention of surgical 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.