RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Approximately 10% of pregnant individuals report a penicillin allergy, yet most are not truly allergic. Allergy verification during pregnancy is safe and recommended; however, many hospitals lack the infrastructure to execute testing. Our aim was to evaluate the cost of developing and implementing a penicillin allergy referral program for pregnant individuals at an academic institution and to compare costs of care between patients who were referred and not referred through the program. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an economic analysis of our institution's antepartum penicillin allergy referral program. We prospectively collected detailed resource utilization data and conducted the analysis from the program's perspective, accounting for costs related to program development, allergy verification, antibiotic cost, and delivery hospitalization. Costs were compared between patients who were referred for evaluation versus patients who were not referred using bivariate tests as well as quantile regression adjusting for baseline differences. A sensitivity analysis was performed for allergy testing cost. All cost estimates were inflation adjusted to 2021 U.S. dollars. RESULTS: The startup cost of program development and educational initiatives was $19,920, or 86 per patient. The median allergy evaluation cost was $397 (interquartile range: $303-663). There was no significant difference in maternal (median: $13,579 vs. 13,999, p = 0.94) or neonatal (median: $3,565 vs. 3,577, p = 0.55) delivery hospitalization cost or antibiotic cost (median: $1.57 vs. 3.87, p = 0.10) between referred and nonreferred patients. Overall, the total cost per person did not differ significantly between study groups (median: $18,931 vs. 18,314, p = 0.69). CONCLUSION: The cost of developing a penicillin allergy referral program in pregnancy was modest and did not significantly alter short-term cost of care with potential for long-term cost benefit. Verification of a reported penicillin allergy is an integral part of antibiotic stewardship, and the pregnancy period should be utilized as an important opportunity to perform this evaluation. KEY POINTS: · The cost of developing and implementing an antepartum penicillin allergy referral program is modest.. · Program cost did not significantly alter short-term cost with a potential for long-term cost benefit.. · Penicillin allergy verification is an important part of antibiotic stewardship and should be expanded..
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Penicilinas , Derivación y Consulta , Centros de Atención Terciaria , Humanos , Femenino , Embarazo , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Penicilinas/economía , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Derivación y Consulta/economía , Antibacterianos/economía , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Adulto , Estudios Prospectivos , Desarrollo de Programa , Centros Médicos AcadémicosRESUMEN
Background: The prevalence of hypersensitivity reactions to radiological contrast media (RCM) is increasing owing to the improved performance of diagnostic and therapeutic tests that require RCMs. Objective: We carried out a year-long real-life observational study to prospectively evaluate patients referred to the allergy department from primary care, the emergency department, and other specialties with suspected moderate-to-severe RCM hypersensitivity reactions. Methods: To study the costs of evaluating RCM hypersensitivity reactions, we systematically recorded direct and indirect costs. Results: Sixty-nine patients with previous reactions to RCM were evaluated in the allergy department from June 1, 2017, to May 31, 2018.Total direct health care costs were 10 715.84, with a mean (SD) cost per patient of 155.30 (77.08). Specifically, direct nonhealth care costs reached 1605.42 (mean, 23.27 [41.14]), and indirect costs were 6490.85 (mean, 94.07 [110.61]). In summary, the total cost was 18 812.11, that is, a mean cost of 272.64 (164.77). Conclusions: Our study shows that the costs of an elective evaluation of hypersensitivity reactions to RCM are low, thus confirming that correct and safe management of affected patients are cost-effective. Therefore, our efforts should be directed toward ensuring the necessary logistics (AU)
Antecedentes: La prevalencia de reacciones de hipersensibilidad a los medios de contraste radiológico (MCR) está aumentando debido al incremento en la realización de pruebas diagnósticas y terapéuticas que requieren MCR. Objetivo: Hemos realizado un estudio observacional de un año de duración para evaluar prospectivamente a los pacientes remitidos al Servicio de Alergología con sospecha de reacciones moderadas a graves por hipersensibilidad a MCR.Métodos: Para estudiar los costes de la evaluación de la hipersensibilidad a MCR, se registraron sistemáticamente los costes directos e indirectos. Resultados: Se evaluaron 69 pacientes con reacciones previas a MCR remitidos al Servicio de Alergología desde el 1 de junio de 2017 hasta el 31 de mayo de 2018. Los costes sanitarios directos totales fueron de 10.715,84 , con un coste medio por paciente de 155,30 ± 77,08. En concreto, los costes directos no sanitarios alcanzaron los 1.605,42 (media 23,27 ± 41,14 ) y los costes indirectos fueron de6.490,85 (media 94,07 ± 110,61 ). En resumen, el coste total fue de 18.812,11 , lo que supone un coste medio de 272,64 ± 164,77 . Conclusiones: Nuestro estudio refleja que los costes de una evaluación electiva de hipersensibilidad a MCR son bajos. Este hecho reafirma que el manejo correcto y seguro de estos pacientes podría ser rentable, por lo que nuestros esfuerzos deben estar dirigidos a implementar la logística necesaria (AU)
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Medios de Contraste/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Estudios Prospectivos , Pruebas CutáneasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Being labeled as allergic to penicillin (unverified ß-lactam allergy) can result in patients receiving broader-spectrum antibiotics than necessary that may be more toxic, less effective, and/or more expensive than alternative options. Objective: We aimed to evaluate the real costs of evaluating ß-lactam allergy. METHODS: We performed a prospective real-life observational study designed to evaluate all adult patients who consulted for suspected ß-lactam allergy over a 1-year period. Direct and indirect costs were systematically recorded. Direct health costs were calculated based on the number of visits and all additional and diagnostic tests performed, direct nonhealth costs based on the number of visits and the distance from their homes to the Allergy Department, and indirect costs based on absenteeism. RESULTS: A total of 296 patients with suspected allergy to ß-lactams were evaluated in our outpatient clinic from June 1, 2017 to May 31, 2018. Total direct health care costs were 28 176.70, with a mean (SD) cost of 95.19 (37.20). Direct nonhealth costs reached 6551.73, that is, 22.13 (40.44) per patient. Indirect health costs reached 20 769.20, with a mean of 70.17 (127.40). In summary, the total cost was 55 497.63, that is, a cost per patient of 187.49 (148.14). CONCLUSIONS: When all possible costs are taken into account, the evaluation of ß-lactam allergy is not expensive and can reduce future expense arising from unnecessary use of more expensive and less effective antibiotics.
Asunto(s)
Alérgenos/inmunología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , beta-Lactamas/inmunología , Adulto , Anciano , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Economía Farmacéutica , Femenino , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Being labeled as allergic to penicillin (unverified beta-lactam allergy) can result in patients receiving broader-spectrum antibiotics than necessary that may be more toxic, less effective, and/or more expensive than alternative options. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the real costs of evaluating beta-lactam allergy. METHODS: We performed a prospective real-life observational study designed to evaluate all adult patients who consulted for suspected beta-lactam allergy over a 1-year period. Direct and indirect costs were systematically recorded. Direct health costs were calculated based on the number of visits and all additional and diagnostic tests performed, direct nonhealth costs based on the number of visits and the distance from their homes to the Allergy Department, and indirect costs based on absenteeism. RESULTS: A total of 296 patients with suspected allergy to beta-lactams were evaluated in our outpatient clinic from June 1, 2017 to May 31, 2018. Total direct health care costs were (Euro)28 176.70, with a mean (SD) cost of (Euro)95.19 (37.20). Direct nonhealth costs reached (Euro)6551.73, that is, (Euro)22.13 (40.44) per patient. Indirect health costs reached (Euro)20 769.20, with a mean of (Euro)70.17 (127.40). In summary, the total cost was (Euro)55 497.63, that is, a cost per patient of (Euro)187.49 (148.14). CONCLUSIONS: When all possible costs are taken into account, the evaluation of beta-lactam allergy is not expensive and can reduce future expense arising from unnecessary use of more expensive and less effective antibiotics
INTRODUCCIÓN: Un diagnóstico no verificado de alergia a la penicilina o a los betalactámicos (BL) conlleva que los pacientes reciban antibióticos de amplio espectro, que pueden ser más tóxicos, menos efectivos, y/o de mayor coste. OBJETIVO: Evaluar los costes reales de un estudio de alergia a los betalactámicos. MÉTODOS: Se diseñó un estudio observacional prospectivo en condiciones de práctica clínica habitual en el que se evaluaron todos los pacientes adultos que consultaron por sospecha de alergia a BL durante un año. Los costes directos e indirectos se recogieron sistemáticamente. Los costes directos sanitarios se calcularon teniendo en cuenta el número de visitas y todas las pruebas diagnósticas realizadas; en los costes directos no sanitarios se consideraron el número de visitas y los kilómetros desde el domicilio hasta el Servicio de Alergología; en los costes indirectos se evaluó el absentismo. RESULTADOS: Se evaluaron 296 pacientes remitidos desde el 1 de junio de 2017 hasta el 31 de mayo de 2018. Los costes directos totales sanitarios fueron 28.176,70 (Euro): coste medio (desviación estándar, DS) de 95,19 (Euro) (37,20). Los costes directos no sanitarios alcanzaron, 6.551,73: coste medio 22,13 (40,44). Los costes indirectos fueron 20.769,20 (Euro): coste medio (DS) 70,17 (127,40). En resumen, la cantidad total fue de 55.497,63 (Euro), lo que supone un coste medio de 187,49 (Euro) (148,14). CONCLUSIONES: Considerando todos los costes posibles, la evaluación de la alergia a betalactámicos no es cara y puede ahorrar gastos futuros debido a una utilización innecesaria de antibióticos más caros y menos efectivos
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Adolescente , Adulto Joven , beta-Lactamas/economía , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , beta-Lactamas/efectos adversos , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Costos Directos de Servicios , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Penicilinas/economía , Estudios Prospectivos , Hipersensibilidad Inmediata/economía , Inmunoglobulina E/economíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the costs associated with evaluation of ß-lactam allergy in children labeled as allergic. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a prospective year-long real life observational study designed to evaluate all pediatric patients with suspected ß-lactam allergy who consulted for allergy evaluation. Direct and indirect costs were systematically recorded. Direct healthcare costs were calculated by taking into account the number of visits and all complementary and diagnostic tests performed. Direct nonhealthcare costs were calculated by considering the number of visits and the kilometers from their homes to the clinic. Finally, indirect costs were evaluated by considering the absenteeism of parents or other companions who took the children to the clinic. RESULTS: A total of 40 children with suspected allergy to ß-lactams were evaluated in our outpatient clinic from June 1, 2017 to May 31, 2018. Total direct healthcare costs were $5038.03, with an average cost per patient of $125.95. Direct nonhealthcare costs reached $901.87 ($22.55 per patient) and indirect nonhealthcare costs reached $6384.35 ($159.61 per patient). The total cost was $12 324.25, a cost of $308.11 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Elective evaluation of ß-lactam allergy and delabeling children who are not allergic is not expensive. In addition, it could save future expenses because of an unnecessary lifelong use of alternative antibiotics that are usually more expensive, less effective, and more frequently associated with antimicrobial resistance and different side effects.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , beta-Lactamas/efectos adversos , Niño , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Femenino , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Prospectivos , Pruebas Cutáneas/economíaRESUMEN
OBJETIVO: Conocer la prevalencia de alergia a fármacos en pacientes hospitalizados de nuestro medio y las características de las reacciones que presentaron y del diagnóstico realizado a estos pacientes. MÉTODO: Estudio observacional transversal llevado a cabo en pacientes hospitalizados en el Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa de Zaragoza mediante una encuesta cumplimentada por los investigadores. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 283 pacientes hospitalizados, con una media de edad de 72,02±14,62 años y una distribución de sexos de 60,1 % hombres y 39,9 % mujeres. Refirieron ser alérgicos a medicamentos 42 de ellos (14,8 %). Se observaron diferencias significativas al analizar el sexo de los pacientes, siendo más frecuente en las mujeres (22,1 % vs 10,0 %) con una OR 2,557. Los diagnósticos de alergia a medicamentos fueron realizados por un alergólogo (33,3 %), médico de atención primaria (38,1 %) u otro especialista (19,0 %). Un 33,3 % de las personas disponía de un informe médico y un 71,4 % afirmaba llevarlo siempre consigo. Un 14,3 % indicó llevar alguna medalla, pulsera o alerta en la cartera. Uno de los participantes presentó una reacción alérgica a levofloxacino durante el ingreso. CONCLUSIONES: Se ha observado una mayor frecuencia de alergia a medicamentos en mujeres. El diagnóstico de alergia a medicamentos fue realizado en un tercio de los pacientes por un alergólogo. Un tercio de las personas que referían ser alérgicas disponía de un informe médico y, de éste, un 71,4 % lo lleva siempre consigo. Uno de los pacientes participantes presentó una reacción alérgica a medicamentos durante el ingreso
OBJETIVO: Conocer la prevalencia de alergia a fármacos en pacientes hospitalizados de nuestro medio y las características de las reacciones que presentaron y del diagnóstico realizado a estos pacientes. MÉTODO: Estudio observacional transversal llevado a cabo en pacientes hospitalizados en el Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa de Zaragoza mediante una encuesta cumplimentada por los investigadores. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 283 pacientes hospitalizados, con una media de edad de 72,02±14,62 años y una distribución de sexos de 60,1 % hombres y 39,9 % mujeres. Refirieron ser alérgicos a medicamentos 42 de ellos (14,8 %). Se observaron diferencias significativas al analizar el sexo de los pacientes, siendo más frecuente en las mujeres (22,1 % vs 10,0 %) con una OR 2,557. Los diagnósticos de alergia a medicamentos fueron realizados por un alergólogo (33,3 %), médico de atención primaria (38,1 %) u otro especialista (19,0 %). Un 33,3 % de las personas disponía de un informe médico y un 71,4 % afirmaba llevarlo siempre consigo. Un 14,3 % indicó llevar alguna medalla, pulsera o alerta en la cartera. Uno de los participantes presentó una reacción alérgica a levofloxacino durante el ingreso. CONCLUSIONES: Se ha observado una mayor frecuencia de alergia a medicamentos en mujeres. El diagnóstico de alergia a medicamentos fue realizado en un tercio de los pacientes por un alergólogo. Un tercio de las personas que referían ser alérgicas disponía de un informe médico y, de éste, un 71,4 % lo lleva siempre consigo. Uno de los pacientes participantes presentó una reacción alérgica a medicamentos durante el ingresos
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/enfermería , Estudios Transversales , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Indicadores de Morbimortalidad , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnósticoRESUMEN
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: As drug allergy research aims to inform clinical practice, implementation of best practices may be influenced by financial resources required to incorporate new interventions and the resulting clinical and economic returns on those resource investments. The present review summarizes new insights into the economics of drug allergy over the past year. RECENT FINDINGS: While considering economic implications of recent drug allergy research, many studies have addressed different contextual factors related to the setting, provider, or outcomes. Advances in technology have enabled specialized allergists to support remote settings through telemedicine consultation. Training opportunities and interdisciplinary approaches to address drug allergy challenges have enabled multiple provider types to play a role in screening, diagnosis, and management. Penicillin allergy testing has been a major focus for many institutions, with several studies focused on de-labeling strategies including confirmatory skin testing and direct oral challenges. SUMMARY: Studies over the past year provide new opportunities for the field of drug allergy research. The focus of current research to capture direct health costs or savings associated with drug allergy interventions demonstrates opportunity for more cost-effective care delivery and opportunity to explore greater benefits to society.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Costo de Enfermedad , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Alergólogos/economía , Alergólogos/organización & administración , Ahorro de Costo , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/terapia , Implementación de Plan de Salud/economía , Implementación de Plan de Salud/organización & administración , Humanos , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/economía , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/organización & administración , Pruebas Cutáneas/economíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: More than 90% of patients who report a penicillin allergy have the allergy disproved when tested. Unnecessary use of alternative (non-beta-lactam) antibiotics can result in more treatment failures and adverse reactions. We described the prevalence and impact of a reported penicillin allergy in high-cost, high-need (HCHN) patients. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. METHODS: We identified HCHN patients in a care management program of an urban academic medical center (January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2016). We used multivariable logistic regression models to determine the association between a reported penicillin allergy and antibiotic use. We used multivariable Poisson regression models to determine the association between a reported penicillin allergy, with or without multiple drug intolerance syndrome (MDIS; ≥3 reported drug allergies), and healthcare resource utilization (HRU). RESULTS: Of 1870 HCHN patients, 383 (20%) reported penicillin allergy, 835 (45%) had MDIS, and 290 (16%) had both. HCHN patients reporting penicillin allergy had an increased odds of beta-lactam alternative antibiotic use (adjusted odds ratio, 3.84; 95% CI, 2.17-6.80). HRU was significantly higher for patients reporting a penicillin allergy alone (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.13; 95% CI, 1.03-1.25) and with concurrent MDIS (aRR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.08-1.34). CONCLUSIONS: HCHN patients had a high burden of reported drug allergy. A reported penicillin allergy conferred a 4-fold increased odds of beta-lactam alternative antibiotic use. Reporting penicillin allergy, with and without MDIS, was associated with significantly more HRU. HCHN care management programs should consider systematic drug allergy evaluations to optimize antibiotic use in these fragile patients.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/economía , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Penicilinas/economía , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Costos y Análisis de Costo/economía , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/epidemiología , Humanos , Medicina Interna/economía , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Estudios RetrospectivosAsunto(s)
Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/prevención & control , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/economía , Neoplasias de la Mama/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Femenino , Humanos , Penicilinas/economía , Atención Perioperativa/economíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Nonprescription of penicillin-containing antibiotics in patients diagnosed with penicillin allergy is associated with morbidity and mortality. Adverse reactions to penicillins comprise type A and B reactions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of penicillin allergy evaluation without penicillin skin testing (PST) for adult patients with type B reactions and the health and economic benefits of this process. METHODS: Inpatients at an Australian tertiary hospital between April 1, 2017, and April 30, 2018, with a diagnosis of type B penicillin allergy, requiring a penicillin-containing antibiotic for treatment, were included. All patients underwent clinical history review, PST, and drug provocation testing (DPT). RESULTS: Seventy-one patients were enrolled. Sixty-three reported a history of type B or unknown adverse reactions. No patients had a history of anaphylaxis requiring intubation or epinephrine within the last 10 years or a history suggesting Gell and Coombs type 2, 3, or 4 (severe) hypersensitivity reaction. Seven did not complete DPT because the treating team used a ß-lactam antibiotic other than amoxicillin. Fifty-four of 56 remaining patients (96%) completed 3-day DPT to amoxicillin with no adverse reaction. Two experienced mild cutaneous reactions. Penicillin allergy evaluation was significantly associated with reduced length of stay, reduced hospital expenditure on bed and second-line antibiotics, and reduced readmission rates. CONCLUSION: Penicillin allergy evaluation with DPT without PST may be feasible for all adult patients with a reported history of type B reactions to penicillins who do not have a history of anaphylaxis within the last 10 years or a type 2, 3, or 4 (severe) hypersensitivity reaction.
Asunto(s)
Amoxicilina/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Anciano , Australia , Técnicas y Procedimientos Diagnósticos/economía , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Femenino , Humanos , Pacientes Internos , Masculino , Centros de Atención TerciariaRESUMEN
Patients labeled as being penicillin-allergic require the use of alternative antibiotics. The objective of this study was to estimate the lifetime antibiotic costs of patients labeled as being penicillin allergic prior to age 10 compared with those who were not penicillin allergic and to compare antibiotic utilization between these 2 groups with regard to risks of adverse effects. Using the low end of the antibiotic cost range, penicillin-allergic patients had a mean lifetime antibiotic cost of $8171 per patient, compared with $6278 for non-penicillin-allergic patients, a difference of $1893. Penicillin-allergic patients utilized more moderate-spectrum antibiotics, more fluoroquinolones, and had a higher estimated Clostridium difficile risk.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/economía , Costos y Análisis de Costo/economía , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Penicilinas/economía , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Niño , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Medición de Riesgo , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
This review focuses on advances in health information technology in the detection, diagnosis, and management of drug allergy. The data regarding the use of electronic health records and social media for the detection of drug allergy are reviewed, along with predictive algorithms and clinical decision support systems for drug allergy diagnosis. Drug allergy pathways, algorithms, computerized decision support systems, and computerized physician order entry for patient management are discussed. The use of electronic consults (e-consults) and telehealth in this field is described, as are efforts to improve communication among patients and providers. Future directions for research are suggested.
Asunto(s)
Sistemas de Apoyo a Decisiones Clínicas , Documentación , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Informática Médica , Consulta Remota , Alergia e Inmunología , Atención a la Salud , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/terapia , Humanos , Sistemas de Entrada de Órdenes Médicas , Pruebas CutáneasAsunto(s)
Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Didesoxinucleósidos/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/prevención & control , Pruebas Genéticas/economía , Técnicas de Genotipaje/economía , Antígenos HLA-B/genética , Inhibidores de la Transcriptasa Inversa/efectos adversos , Didesoxinucleósidos/economía , Didesoxinucleósidos/uso terapéutico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/genética , Marcadores Genéticos , Genotipo , Infecciones por VIH/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Polimorfismo Genético , Inhibidores de la Transcriptasa Inversa/economía , Inhibidores de la Transcriptasa Inversa/uso terapéutico , Medición de Riesgo , SingapurRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Beta-lactams are the mainstay for treating methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infections complicated by bacteremia due to superior outcomes compared with vancomycin. With approximately 11% of inpatients reporting a penicillin (PCN) allergy, many patients receive suboptimal treatment for MSSA bacteremia. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the cost-effectiveness of penicillin skin testing (PST) in adult patients with self-reported PCN allergy in an inpatient setting undergoing treatment for MSSA bacteremia. METHODS: A decision analytic model was developed comparing an acute care PST intervention to a scenario with no confirmatory allergy testing. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) from the health-sector perspective over a 1-year time horizon using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as the measure for effectiveness. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the uncertainty of the ICER estimation. RESULTS: Over a 1-year time horizon, PST services applied to all MSSA bacteremia patients reporting a PCN-allergy would result in a cost per patient of $12,559 and 0.73 QALYs while no PST services would have a higher cost per patient of $13,219 and 0.66 QALYs per patient. This resulted in a cost-effectiveness estimate of -$9,429 per QALY gained. Varying the cost of implementing PST services determined a break-even point of $959.98 where any PST cost less than this amount would actually be cost saving. CONCLUSIONS: Patients reporting a PCN allergy on admission may receive sub-optimal alternative therapies to beta-lactams, such as vancomycin, for MSSA bacteremia. This economic analysis demonstrates that inpatient PST services confirming PCN allergy are cost-effective for patients with MSSA bacteremia.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Bacteriemia/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Pruebas Cutáneas/economía , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/complicaciones , Adulto , Bacteriemia/diagnóstico , Bacteriemia/epidemiología , Bacteriemia/microbiología , Humanos , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente a Meticilina/efectos de los fármacos , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/microbiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Penicillin skin testing (PST) is increasingly used as a tool to evaluate penicillin allergy in patients with a reported history. The limited availability of allergists, however, may be an impeding factor. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the clinical utility of telemedicine to facilitate PST. METHODS: Penicillin-allergic inpatients receiving systemic antibiotics were prospectively identified between April and August 2017. Qualifying patients underwent PST performed by a trained allergy/immunology physician assistant (PA). On completion of PST, a telemedicine consultation, through the use of real-time interactive video conferencing (Microsoft Lync 2013, Redmond, Wash), was performed remotely by an allergist. Patients were surveyed regarding their satisfaction with the telemedicine experience. RESULTS: Fifty patients consented to PST through a telemedicine consultation. The average total time to complete a consultation was 128 minutes (standard deviation [SD] ± 33). Of this, the average PA travel time was 46 minutes (36%) with the remaining time spent on clinical services (82 minutes, 64%). The average physician telemedicine time per patient was 5 minutes (SD ± 2). Patients rated their experience as an average of 4.5 on a scale of 1 (highly unsatisfied) to 5 (highly satisfied). Of the 46 PST-negative patients, 33 were transitioned to a ß-lactam antibiotic that reduced the use of vancomycin, metronidazole, aztreonam, aminoglycosides, and clindamycin (P < .05). More than $30,000 was saved throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine is an effective and novel approach to facilitate PST in the inpatient setting and carries a high degree of patient satisfaction. This method has the potential to optimize and improve access to allergy/immunology resources.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Penicilinas/uso terapéutico , Pruebas Cutáneas/métodos , Telemedicina/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Alérgenos/inmunología , Antibacterianos/inmunología , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Femenino , Humanos , Pacientes Internos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Penicilinas/inmunología , Estudios Prospectivos , Derivación y Consulta , Comunicación por VideoconferenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Many patients admitted to hospital have an antibiotic allergy (AAL) documented in their medical record. In many of these, the reaction is not a hypersensitivity reaction or may no longer be relevant. Despite this, the label adversely affects patient care directly in terms of antibiotic selection, and indirectly in terms of patient costs and the development of antimicrobial resistance. AIMS: To estimate the prevalence of AALs in a cohort of hospitalised patients, to investigate the feasibility of de-labelling through re-challenge based solely upon clinical grounds. DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional study conducted over a 6-month period on adult inpatients. An allergy history was taken from each patient and compared with medical record data regarding allergy. Antibiotic selection data were collected (if relevant). It was then determined whether immediate de-labelling was appropriate, if direct provocation test (DPT) could be relatively safely performed, and if antibiotic selection was appropriate. RESULTS: Three thousand eight hundred and fifty five patients were screened, 553 (14.35%) had an AAL, and 352 were interviewed. There were 426 AALs; 276 (64.8%) towards a penicillin. After taking a detailed clinical history of the type of reaction, approximately 20% could be immediately de-labelled and educated (non-allergic, non-severe reactions) and another 38% with either a definite or vague history of mild cutaneous reaction would be suitable for an attempt at clinical de-labelling DPT. CONCLUSIONS: These simple measures to 'de-label' patients appropriately, would increase the quality of care of this group known to have higher costs, infection with more resistant bacteria and worse health outcomes that 'non-labelled' patients.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/economía , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Adulto , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Estudios Transversales , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Registros Médicos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Penicilinas/economía , PrevalenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients who report a penicillin (PCN) allergy receive suboptimal antibiotic therapy compared with patients not reporting an allergy. However, a majority of patients who report PCN allergy are not truly allergic on confirmatory testing. Ruling out PCN allergy by testing may improve clinical and economic outcomes for patients with reported allergies requiring antibiotic therapy. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to summarize clinical and economic outcomes associated with PCN allergy and provide recommendations for future cost-effectiveness analyses for PCN allergy testing. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using SCOPUS, EMBASE, and PubMed, including all articles published any date through April 25, 2017 (PROSPERO Registration number 42017064112). A total of 1518 abstracts were found during the initial search with 96 duplicates, for a total of 1422 articles for screening. Thirty articles were included for qualitative synthesis and full data extraction. RESULTS: The majority of the studies included had an observational design focusing on inpatient admissions. The most frequently measured outcome in the context of PCN allergy was optimizing antibiotic therapy. Patients with PCN allergy were found to have direct drug costs during inpatient admission ranging from no difference to an additional $609/patient compared with patients without PCN allergy. Outpatient prescription costs were estimated from $14 to $193/patient higher for PCN allergic patients. Total inpatient costs were less for patients without PCN allergy with average savings from $1145 to $4254/patient. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluations of clinical and economic outcomes of PCN allergy are primarily observational and focus on inpatient populations. Long-term relationships between PCN allergy and clinical and economic outcomes are unknown.
Asunto(s)
Alérgenos/inmunología , Antibacterianos/inmunología , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Penicilinas/inmunología , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Penicilinas/uso terapéutico , AutoinformeRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Unverified penicillin allergy leads to adverse downstream clinical and economic sequelae. Penicillin allergy evaluation can be used to identify true, IgE-mediated allergy. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost of penicillin allergy evaluation using time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC). METHODS: We implemented TDABC throughout the care pathway for 30 outpatients presenting for penicillin allergy evaluation. The base-case evaluation included penicillin skin testing and a 1-step amoxicillin drug challenge, performed by an allergist. We varied assumptions about the provider type, clinical setting, procedure type, and personnel timing. RESULTS: The base-case penicillin allergy evaluation costs $220 in 2016 US dollars: $98 for personnel, $119 for consumables, and $3 for space. In sensitivity analyses, lower cost estimates were achieved when only a drug challenge was performed (ie, no skin test, $84) and a nurse practitioner provider was used ($170). Adjusting for the probability of anaphylaxis did not result in a changed estimate ($220); although other analyses led to modest changes in the TDABC estimate ($214-$246), higher estimates were identified with changing to a low-demand practice setting ($268), a 50% increase in personnel times ($269), and including clinician documentation time ($288). In a least/most costly scenario analyses, the lowest TDABC estimate was $40 and the highest was $537. CONCLUSIONS: Using TDABC, penicillin allergy evaluation costs $220; even with varied assumptions adjusting for operational challenges, clinical setting, and expanded testing, penicillin allergy evaluation still costs only about $540. This modest investment may be offset for patients treated with costly alternative antibiotics that also may result in adverse consequences.
Asunto(s)
Alérgenos/inmunología , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Pruebas Diagnósticas de Rutina/economía , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/economía , Penicilinas/inmunología , Atención Ambulatoria , Amoxicilina/inmunología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Humanos , Inmunoglobulina E/metabolismo , Pruebas CutáneasRESUMEN
PURPOSE: An initiative to determine the effects of penicillin skin testing (PST) from an antimicrobial stewardship perspective is described. SUMMARY: Penicillin allergy is one of the most frequently reported allergies; however, only about 10% of self-reports of penicillin allergy are accurate. Incorrect penicillin allergies are therefore a significant barrier to antimicrobial stewardship, with important clinical and economic implications, including increased antimicrobial resistance, an increased overall cost of care, increased length of stay, and, ultimately, increased mortality. As part of its antimicrobial stewardship program, a community health system launched a PST initiative in order to optimize therapy, reduce adverse events acquisition costs, and minimize development of antibiotic resistance. The PST program involves the use of a standardized protocol for the assessment of hypersensitivity to penicillin in patients with suspected penicillin allergy. Among 36 patients who completed the PST protocol during an eight-month period, all had a negative result; in 27 of those patients, a conversion of antimicrobial therapy to a penicillin or cephalosporin was implemented as a direct result of PST. CONCLUSION: In patients with a self-reported penicillin allergy, PST led to a reduction in the use of carbapenems, aztreonam, vancomycin, and other broad-spectrum agents within a health system. A decrease in drug costs was documented in a sample of patients switched to a penicillin or a cephalosporin after PST.