Cost-effectiveness analysis of active surveillance screening for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in an academic hospital setting.
ABSTRACT To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 3 alternative active screening strategies for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): universal surveillance screening for all hospital admissions, targeted surveillance screening for intensive care unit admissions, and no surveillance screening.
Cost-effectiveness analysis using decision modeling.
Cost-effectiveness was evaluated from the perspective of an 800-bed academic hospital with 40,000 annual admissions over the time horizon of a hospitalization. All input probabilities, costs, and outcome data were obtained through a comprehensive literature review. Effectiveness outcome was MRSA healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.
In the base case, targeted surveillance screening was a dominant strategy (ie, was associated with lower costs and resulted in better outcomes) for preventing MRSA HAI. Universal surveillance screening was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $14,955 per MRSA HAI. In one-way sensitivity analysis, targeted surveillance screening was a dominant strategy across most parameter ranges. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis also demonstrated that targeted surveillance screening was the most cost-effective strategy when willingness to pay to prevent a case of MRSA HAI was less than $71,300.
Targeted active surveillance screening for MRSA is the most cost-effective screening strategy in an academic hospital setting. Additional studies that are based on actual hospital data are needed to validate this model. However, the model supports current recommendations to use active surveillance to detect MRSA.
- SourceAvailable from: Kenneth J Smith[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) transmission and infections are a continuing problem in hospitals. Although some have recommended universal surveillance for MRSA at hospital admission to identify and to isolate MRSA-colonized patients, there is a need for formal economic studies to determine the cost-effectiveness of such a strategy. We developed a stochastic computer simulation model to determine the potential economic impact of performing MRSA surveillance (ie, single culture of an anterior nares specimen) for all hospital admissions at different MRSA prevalences and basic reproductive rate thresholds from the societal and third party-payor perspectives. Patients with positive surveillance culture results were placed under isolation precautions to prevent transmission by way of respiratory droplets. MRSA-colonized patients who were not isolated could transmit MRSA to other hospital patients. The performance of universal MRSA surveillance was cost-effective (defined as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of less than $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year) when the basic reproductive rate was 0.25 or greater and the prevalence was 1% or greater. In fact, surveillance was the dominant strategy when the basic reproductive rate was 1.5 or greater and the prevalence was 15% or greater, the basic reproductive rate was 2.0 or greater and the prevalence was 10% or greater, and the basic reproductive rate was 2.5 or greater and the prevalence was 5% or greater. Universal MRSA surveillance of adults at hospital admission appears to be cost-effective at a wide range of prevalence and basic reproductive rate values. Individual hospitals and healthcare systems could compare their prevailing conditions (eg, the prevalence of MRSA colonization and MRSA transmission dynamics) with the benchmarks in our model to help determine their optimal local strategies.Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 06/2010; 31(6):598-606. · 4.02 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To assess the impact of real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) on nosocomial transmission and costs. Monthly MRSA detection rates were measured from April 1, 2000, through December 31, 2005. Time series analysis was used to identify changes in MRSA detection rates, and decision analysis was used to compare the costs of detection by PCR and by culture.Setting. A 1,200-bed, tertiary care hospital in Canada. Admitted patients at high risk for MRSA colonization. MRSA detection using culture-based screening was compared with a commercial PCR assay. The mean monthly incidence of nosocomial MRSA colonization or infection was 0.37 cases per 1,000 patient-days. The time-series model indicated an insignificant decrease of 0.14 cases per 1,000 patient-days per month (95% confidence interval, -0.18 to 0.46) after the introduction of PCR detection (P=.39). The mean interval from a reported positive result until contact precautions were initiated decreased from 3.8 to 1.6 days (P<.001). However, the cost of MRSA control increased from Can$605,034 to Can$771,609. Of 290 PCR-positive patients, 120 (41.4%) were placed under contact precautions unnecessarily because of low specificity of the PCR assay used in the study; these patients contributed 37% of the increased cost. The modeling study predicted that the cost per patient would be higher with detection by PCR (Can$96) than by culture (Can$67). Detection of MRSA by the PCR assay evaluated in this study was more costly than detection by culture for reducing MRSA transmission in our hospital. The cost benefit of screening by PCR varies according to incidences of MRSA colonization and infection, the predictive values of the assay used, and rates of compliance with infection control measures.Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 10/2007; 28(10):1134-41. · 4.02 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To conduct an exploratory study to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost benefit of universal versus targeted screening for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) to prevent hospital-acquired MRSA infections. Prospective, interventional study, using a case-control design, difference-in-differences, and cost-benefit analyses. Two community hospitals in Wisconsin. Consecutive sample of 15,049 adult admissions from April 2009 to July 2010. MRSA surveillance performed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) on samples collected from all adult patients (aged over 18 years) within 30 days before or upon an admission to the hospital. During a 9-month baseline period, targeted screening was conducted at both hospitals. During the 5-month intervention period, all patients admitted to the intervention hospital were screened for MRSA. Infection control measures were consistent at both hospitals. Universal screening was associated with an increase in admission screening of 43.58 percentage points (P< .01), an increase in MRSA detection of 2.95 percentage points (P< .01), and a small, nonsignificant decline in hospital-acquired MRSA infections of 0.12 percentage points (P< .01). The benefit-to-cost ratio was 0.50, indicating that for every dollar spent on universal versus targeted screening, only $0.50 is recovered in avoided costs of hospital-acquired MRSA infection. Compared with targeted screening, universal screening increased the rate of detection of MRSA upon hospital admission but did not significantly reduce the rate of hospital-acquired MRSA infection. Universal screening was associated with higher costs of care and was not cost beneficial.Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 08/2011; 32(8):797-803. · 4.02 Impact Factor