Cost-effectiveness of linezolid versus vancomycin in mechanical ventilation-associated nosocomial pneumonia caused by methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus

Linezolid, an oxazolidinone-class antimicrobial agent, is a new drug; its use has frequently been questioned due to its high price. However, recent trials have demonstrated that the use of linezolid in mechanical ventilation-associated nosocomial pneumonia caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (VAP-MRSA) may be justified due to its improved efficacy compared to vancomycin. Price and cost have different magnitudes, and clinical efficacy should always be considered in the decision-making process. Our objective was to determine whether linezolid treatment was more cost-effective than vancomycin for treating VAP-MRSA. METHODOLOGY: Elaboration of an economic model from a metanalysis of previous clinical trials comparing both drugs, through a cost-effectiveness analysis. Costs of the treatments were calculated using Brazilian parameters and were compared to the results obtained in the metanalysis. In order to compare the results with real life conditions, costs were calculated for both name brand and for generic vancomycin. RESULTS: The cost (May/2004) per unit (vial, ampoule or bag) was R$ 47.73 for the name-brand vancomycin, R$ 14.45 for generic vancomycin and R$ 214.04 for linezolid. Linezolid's efficacy in VAP-MRSA according to the metanalysis was 62.2 percent and vancomycin's efficacy was 21.2 percent. The total cost per cured patient was R$ 13,231.65 for the name-brand vancomycin, R$ 11,277.59 for generic vancomycin and R$ 7,764.72 for linezolid. CONCLUSION: Despite the higher price per unit, linezolid was more cost-effective than vancomycin.

Pharmacy distribution of advice, symptomatic treatment and antimicrobial drugs to patients with cough

It i an accepted fact that, in many countries, pharmacies are the predominat source of medical advice over-the-counter drugs, and supplies of "prescription-only" drugs for sale without a prescription. To assess the activities conducted by pharmacists or pharmacy counter assistants in response to a common health problem, a cross-sectional study was done at 114 pharmacies in Porto Alegre, Brazil. A fictitious case-history of cough was used by trained personnel entering the pharmacy and the subsequent activities by the pharmacist or pharmacy counter assistant were analyzed. Some kind of medication was provided in 101 (88.5 percent)of the pharmacies. Pharmacists gave medication in 80 percent of pharmacies, and pharmacy assistants in 95.5 percent (p<0.03). The class of medication most frequently dispensed was the expectorants (97 times, 92.4 percent), however, systemic antibiotics were provided in 11 pharmacies (10.5 percent). Of note, the pharmacists provided antibiotics more frequently than did pharmacy assistants (p=0.016). We conclude that pharmacy advice and symptomatic medical care (expectorants) are very common and that pharmacy assistants are more likely than pharmacists to provide medication. Of concern, when pharmacists were the drug dispensers of antibiotics which should be provided by prescription only, drugs were provided without proper diagnosis, and often incorrect dosages. This reflects a pontentially dangerous practice in need of careful evaluation, education and supervision.

Achados oculares em crianças HIV positivas / Ophthalmologic findings in HIV positive children

Vários estudos têm demonstrado a existência de achados oftálmicos na Sídrome de Imunodeficiência em pacientes adultos. Entretanto, em pacientes pediátricos, näo existe ainda um padräo oftálmico bem definido para esta patologia. Nesta série, estudamos 8 pacientes HIV positivos. Foi realizado exame oftálmico completo em cada paciente. Um paciente apresentava microftalmia e leucocoria decorrente de sua doença de base (hemofilia). Um paciente apresentava coriorretinite toxoplásmica. Näo foi estabelecido um padräo oftálmico neste grupo