ArticleCritical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine2026
The cost analysis of remifentanil and fentanyl for analgosedation in mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care: Post hoc analysis of an open-labelled pilot randomised controlled study.
Article in Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare total hospital costs associated with remifentanil versus fentanyl for analgosedation in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients, given increasing interest in remifentanil as a feasible alternative, but limited economic evidence. Design: Cost analysis of a single-centre, prospective, randomised controlled trial (remi-fent1 RCT). Setting: Nepean Hospital ICU, New South Wales, Australia. Patients: Adult patients admitted between June 2020 and August 2021 requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) who were randomised to receive remifentanil or fentanyl as part of their analgosedation regimen. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was total hospital bed-day costs (Australian Dollars), estimated from a healthcare payer perspective using the Australian Independent Hospital Pricing Authority National Pricing Model for the financial year 2020-2021. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at 6 months was measured using the generic EuroQoL 5-dimension 5-level (EQ-5D-5L) instrument. Pre-specified subgroup analyses examined age (arbitrary cut-off 65 years) and duration of IMV (arbitrary cut-off 72 h). Results: A total of 210 patients were analysed (remifentanil n = 104; fentanyl n = 106). Opioid acquisition costs were comparable between groups. Total mean hospital bed-day costs were lower in the remifentanil group compared with the fentanyl ($48,301 [$38,644-$57,958] vs. $37,012 [95% confidence interval {CI}: $27,834-$46,191]; p = 0.006). The remifentanil group was associated with lower total hospital costs in older patients (≥65 years) and in those ventilated for ≤72 h. At 6 months, 110 patients were alive, with 7 lost to follow-up, (61/103 remifentanil [59.2%] vs. 59/100 fentanyl [59.0%]; p = 0.80). Among survivors, remifentanil continued to demonstrate lower overall hospital costs, but 6-month HRQoL remained similar between groups (EQ-5D-5L index 0.83 vs. 0.87; p = 0.24). Conclusion: Remifentanil was associated with lower total hospital costs than fentanyl, without differences in survival or HRQoL at 6 months, suggesting that remifentanil may be a lower-cost alternative for analgosedation. However, the results are exploratory and require confirmation in larger, adequately powered multicentre phase-2 trials.
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.