Impacting cost and appropriateness of stress ulcer prophylaxis at a university medical center.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the appropriateness and medication cost of stress ulcer prophylaxis before and after a targeted educational intervention. DESIGN: In the preintervention cohort (phase 1), 264 patients were evaluated over 2 months, using stress ulcer prophylaxis guidelines developed by a comprehensive literature search. Targeted educational programs were subsequently used to inform trauma housestaff on appropriate usage of stress ulcer prophylaxis medications with emphasis on using sucralfate. The postintervention cohort (phase 2) involved concurrent evaluation of 279 patients. Length of inappropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis (i.e., did not meet approved guidelines) between phases was compared using a Student's t-test for independent samples (alpha = .05). SETTING: A 365-bed university medical center. PATIENTS: Patients admitted to any of the intensive care units and all patients who were placed on histamine-2-antagonists or sucralfate for stress ulcer prophylaxis. INTERVENTIONS: Educational intervention regarding appropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis directed at the trauma service. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patient demographics in the two phases were similar and there was no difference in the number of patient risk factors for stress-induced bleeding. The mean length of inappropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis was 5.78 +/- 4.36 days in phase 1 and 4.66 +/- 3.10 days in phase 2 (p < .05). Eighty-nine patients in phase 1 received inappropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis for a drug cost of $2,272.00 (mean $25.53 +/- 25.52) compared with 90 patients in phase 2 with a drug cost of $1,417.00 (mean $15.75 +/- 13.06). Three patients in each phase had clinically important bleeding (hemodynamic compromise or transfusion); all were receiving ranitidine. The mean total cost (fixed and variable) of hospitalization was $69,288.00 and $74,709.00 for the three patients who bled in each phase compared with $19,850.00 and $15,812.00 for all patients admitted to the intensive care unit in phases 1 and 2, respectively. The mean length of hospital stay was 30.00 days and 29.33 days for the three patients who bled in each phase compared with 11.54 days and 10.27 days for all patients admitted to the intensive care unit in phases 1 and 2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Cost savings are associated with more appropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis. Clinically important bleeding is uncommon but results in prolonged hospital stays and increased costs.

Adverse events and cost savings three years after implementation of guidelines for outpatient contrast-agent use.

The ability of guidelines limiting the use of low-osmolality contrast media (LOCM) to save money without jeopardizing patient care was studies. In February 1993 an academic medical center implemented guidelines to reduce the use of LOCM for outpatient computed tomography and excretory urography; the guidelines limited LOCM to patients at high risk of adverse reactions to contrast agents. Data on contrast media received and frequency of adverse events were compiled from billing sheets and incident reports for March 1993 through February 1996. The number of patients receiving LOCM over the three years was 1325, and the number receiving high-osmolality contrast media (HOCM) was 4435. Of the HOCM recipients, 165 (3.7%) had adverse reactions; 0.4% of these reactions were major, 3.1% were minor, and 0.2% were extravasations. Among LOCM-treated patients, 35 (2.7%) had adverse reactions; 0.5% were major, 1.7% were minor, and 0.5% were extravasations. The only significant difference in adverse effects between the groups was in the frequency of minor reactions. The costs of HOCM and LOCM over the three years were $54,660 and $152,523, respectively. Had 90% of the 5760 patients received LOCM, the total cost of contrast agents would have been $603,723; thus, the estimated drug cost saving was $396,540, or $132,180 annually. With costs of treating adverse events factored in, the net annual cost saving was $132,093. Guidelines limiting the use of LOCM to high-risk patients saved an academic medical center an estimated $132,093 annually in drug costs for specific outpatient imaging procedures, without adversely affecting patient care.