Cefotaxime vs Nafcillin and Tobramycin for the Treatment of Serious Infection: Comparative Cost-effectiveness

Richard D Moore, Craig R. Smith, James J. Holloway, Paul S. Lietman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

• To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cefotaxime sodium at a dosage of 12 g/day vs nafcillin sodium and tobramycin sulfate for the treatment of serious infection, the hospital and physician charges of patients enrolled in a prospective, randomized, clinical trial were analyzed. For 187 patients receiving therapy empirically, mean hospital charges for the interval in which the trial antibiotics were used were $3,550±$1,740 for cefotaxime and $3,160±$1,990 for nafcillin and tobramycin. After adjusting for cost-generating factors, charges for cefotaxime were greater than for nafcillin and tobramycin, but the difference was not significant. For 107 patients with clinically or bacteriologically documented infection, mean charges were $3,980±$1,800 for cefotaxime and $4,170±$1,780 for nafcillin and tobramycin. Adjusted charges did not differ. Incremental charges for cefotaxime per additional response were $1,630 in all patients and -$820 in patients with clinically or bacteriologically documented infections.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1153-1157
Number of pages5
JournalArchives of Internal Medicine
Volume146
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 1986

Fingerprint

Nafcillin
Tobramycin
Cefotaxime
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Hospital Charges
Infection
Therapeutics
Randomized Controlled Trials
Anti-Bacterial Agents
Physicians
Costs and Cost Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Cefotaxime vs Nafcillin and Tobramycin for the Treatment of Serious Infection : Comparative Cost-effectiveness. / Moore, Richard D; Smith, Craig R.; Holloway, James J.; Lietman, Paul S.

In: Archives of Internal Medicine, Vol. 146, No. 6, 1986, p. 1153-1157.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Moore, Richard D ; Smith, Craig R. ; Holloway, James J. ; Lietman, Paul S. / Cefotaxime vs Nafcillin and Tobramycin for the Treatment of Serious Infection : Comparative Cost-effectiveness. In: Archives of Internal Medicine. 1986 ; Vol. 146, No. 6. pp. 1153-1157.
@article{45ab1834aeb549b88132987cca80fe41,
title = "Cefotaxime vs Nafcillin and Tobramycin for the Treatment of Serious Infection: Comparative Cost-effectiveness",
abstract = "• To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cefotaxime sodium at a dosage of 12 g/day vs nafcillin sodium and tobramycin sulfate for the treatment of serious infection, the hospital and physician charges of patients enrolled in a prospective, randomized, clinical trial were analyzed. For 187 patients receiving therapy empirically, mean hospital charges for the interval in which the trial antibiotics were used were $3,550±$1,740 for cefotaxime and $3,160±$1,990 for nafcillin and tobramycin. After adjusting for cost-generating factors, charges for cefotaxime were greater than for nafcillin and tobramycin, but the difference was not significant. For 107 patients with clinically or bacteriologically documented infection, mean charges were $3,980±$1,800 for cefotaxime and $4,170±$1,780 for nafcillin and tobramycin. Adjusted charges did not differ. Incremental charges for cefotaxime per additional response were $1,630 in all patients and -$820 in patients with clinically or bacteriologically documented infections.",
author = "Moore, {Richard D} and Smith, {Craig R.} and Holloway, {James J.} and Lietman, {Paul S.}",
year = "1986",
doi = "10.1001/archinte.1986.00360180159024",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "146",
pages = "1153--1157",
journal = "JAMA Internal Medicine",
issn = "2168-6106",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cefotaxime vs Nafcillin and Tobramycin for the Treatment of Serious Infection

T2 - Comparative Cost-effectiveness

AU - Moore, Richard D

AU - Smith, Craig R.

AU - Holloway, James J.

AU - Lietman, Paul S.

PY - 1986

Y1 - 1986

N2 - • To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cefotaxime sodium at a dosage of 12 g/day vs nafcillin sodium and tobramycin sulfate for the treatment of serious infection, the hospital and physician charges of patients enrolled in a prospective, randomized, clinical trial were analyzed. For 187 patients receiving therapy empirically, mean hospital charges for the interval in which the trial antibiotics were used were $3,550±$1,740 for cefotaxime and $3,160±$1,990 for nafcillin and tobramycin. After adjusting for cost-generating factors, charges for cefotaxime were greater than for nafcillin and tobramycin, but the difference was not significant. For 107 patients with clinically or bacteriologically documented infection, mean charges were $3,980±$1,800 for cefotaxime and $4,170±$1,780 for nafcillin and tobramycin. Adjusted charges did not differ. Incremental charges for cefotaxime per additional response were $1,630 in all patients and -$820 in patients with clinically or bacteriologically documented infections.

AB - • To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cefotaxime sodium at a dosage of 12 g/day vs nafcillin sodium and tobramycin sulfate for the treatment of serious infection, the hospital and physician charges of patients enrolled in a prospective, randomized, clinical trial were analyzed. For 187 patients receiving therapy empirically, mean hospital charges for the interval in which the trial antibiotics were used were $3,550±$1,740 for cefotaxime and $3,160±$1,990 for nafcillin and tobramycin. After adjusting for cost-generating factors, charges for cefotaxime were greater than for nafcillin and tobramycin, but the difference was not significant. For 107 patients with clinically or bacteriologically documented infection, mean charges were $3,980±$1,800 for cefotaxime and $4,170±$1,780 for nafcillin and tobramycin. Adjusted charges did not differ. Incremental charges for cefotaxime per additional response were $1,630 in all patients and -$820 in patients with clinically or bacteriologically documented infections.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0022539675&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0022539675&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/archinte.1986.00360180159024

DO - 10.1001/archinte.1986.00360180159024

M3 - Article

C2 - 3087307

AN - SCOPUS:0022539675

VL - 146

SP - 1153

EP - 1157

JO - JAMA Internal Medicine

JF - JAMA Internal Medicine

SN - 2168-6106

IS - 6

ER -