BackgroundWe aimed to assess the hospital economic costs of nosocomial multi-drug resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa acquisition.MethodsA retrospective study of all hospital admissions between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2006 was carried out in a 420-bed, urban, tertiary-care teaching hospital in Barcelona (Spain). All patients with a first positive clinical culture for P. aeruginosa more than 48 h after admission were included. Patient and hospitalization characteristics were collected from hospital and microbiology laboratory computerized records. According to antibiotic susceptibility, isolates were classified as non-resistant, resistant and multi-drug resistant. Cost estimation was based on a full-costing cost accounting system and on the criteria of clinical Activity-Based Costing methods. Multivariate analyses were performed using generalized linear models of log-transformed costs.ResultsCost estimations were available for 402 nosocomial incident P. aeruginosa positive cultures. Their distribution by antibiotic susceptibility pattern was 37.1% non-resistant, 29.6% resistant and 33.3% multi-drug resistant. The total mean economic cost per admission of patients with multi-drug resistant P. aeruginosa strains was higher than that for non-resistant strains (15,265 vs. 4,933 Euros). In multivariate analysis, resistant and multi-drug resistant strains were independently predictive of an increased hospital total cost in compared with non-resistant strains (the incremental increase in total hospital cost was more than 1.37-fold and 1.77-fold that for non-resistant strains, respectively).ConclusionsP. aeruginosa multi-drug resistance independently predicted higher hospital costs with a more than 70% increase per admission compared with non-resistant strains. Prevention of the nosocomial emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistant microorganisms is essential to limit the strong economic impact.
BackgroundThe impact of immigration on health services utilisation has been analysed by several studies performed in countries with lower levels of immigration than Spain. These studies indicate that health services utilisation is lower among the immigrant population than among the host population and that immigrants tend to use hospital emergency services at the expense of primary care. We aimed to quantify the relative over-utilisation of emergency services in the immigrant population.MethodsEmergency visits to Hospital del Mar in Barcelona in 2002 and 2003 were analysed. The country of origin, gender, age, discharge-related circumstances (hospital admission, discharge to home, or death), medical specialty, and variable cost related to medical care were registered. Immigrants were grouped into those from high-income countries (IHIC) and those from low-income countries (ILIC) and the average direct cost was compared by country of origin. A multivariate linear mixed model of direct costs was adjusted by country of origin (classified in five groups) and by the individual variables of age, gender, hospital admission, and death as a cause of discharge. Medical specialty was considered as a random effect.ResultsWith the exception of gynaecological emergency visits, costs resulting from emergency visits by both groups of immigrants were lower than those due to visits by the Spanish-born population. This effect was especially marked for emergency visits by adults.ConclusionImmigrants tend to use the emergency department in preference to other health services. No differences were found between IHIC and ILIC, suggesting that this result was due to the ease of access to emergency services and to lack of knowledge about the country's health system rather than to poor health status resulting from immigrants' socioeconomic position. The use of costs as a variable of complexity represents an opportunistic use of a highly exhaustive registry, which is becoming ever more frequent in hospitals and which overcomes the lack of clinical information related to outpatient activity.
BackgroundThe recent increase in the number of immigrants of Barcelona represents a challenge for the public healthcare system, the emergency department being the most used healthcare service by this group. However, utilisation rates in our environment have not yet been studied. We aimed to compare emergency department utilisation rates between Spanish-born and foreign-born residents in a public hospital of Barcelona.MethodsThe study population included all adults residing in the area of study and visiting the emergency department of Hospital del Mar in 2004. The emergency care episodes were selected from the Emergency Department register, and the population figures from the Statistics Department of Barcelona. Emergency care episodes were classified into five large clinical categories. Adjusted rate ratios (RR) of utilisation among foreign-born vs. Spanish-born residents were assessed through negative binomial regression.ResultsThe overall utilisation rate was 382 emergency contacts per 1,000 persons-years. The RR for foreign-born versus Spanish-born residents was 0.62 (95% CI: 0.52; 0.74%). The RR was also significantly below one in surgery (0.51, 95% CI: 0.42; 0.63), traumatology (0.47, 95% CI: 0.38; 0.59), medicine (0.48, 95% CI: 0.38; 0.59) and psychiatry (0.42, 95% CI: 0.18; 0.97). No differences were found in utilisation of gynaecology and minor emergency services.ConclusionThe overall lower utilisation rates obtained for foreign-born residents is consistent with previous studies and is probably due to the "healthy immigrant effect". Thus, the population increase due to immigration does not translate directly into a corresponding increase in the number of emergency contacts. The lack of differences in minor and gynaecological emergency care supports the hypothesis that immigrants overcome certain barriers by using the emergency department to access to health services. The issue of healthcare barriers should therefore be addressed, especially among immigrants.
BackgroundThe aim of this study was to estimate healthcare resource utilization, work absenteeism and cost per patient with pandemic influenza (H1N1)2009, from its beginning to March 2010, in Spain. We also estimated the economic impact on healthcare services.Methods and FindingsLongitudinal, descriptive, multicenter study of in- and outpatients with confirmed diagnosis of influenza A (H1N1) in Spain. Temporal distribution of cases was comparable to that in Spain. Information of healthcare and social resources used from one week before admission (inpatient) or index-medical visit (outpatient) until recovery was gathered. Unit cost was imputed to utilization frequency for the monetary valuation of use. Mean cost per patient was calculated. A sensitivity analysis was conducted, and variables correlated with cost per patient were identified. Economic impact on the healthcare system was estimated using healthcare costs per patient and both, the reported number of confirmed and clinical cases in Spain. 172 inpatients and 224 outpatients were included. Less than 10% were over 65 years old and more than 50% had previous comorbidities. 12.8% of inpatients were admitted to the Intensive Care Unit. Mean length of hospital stay of patients not requiring critical care was 5 days (SD = 4.4). All working-inpatients and 91.7% working-outpatients went on sick leave. On average, work absenteeism was 30.5 days (SD = 20.7) for the first ones and 9 days (SD = 6.3) for the latest. Caregivers of 21.7% of inpatients and 8.5% of outpatients also had work absenteeism during 10.7 and 4.1 days on average respectively. Mean cost was €6,236/inpatient (CI95% = 1,384–14,623) and €940/outpatient (CI95% = 66–3,064). The healthcare economic burden of patients with confirmed influenza was €144,773,577 (IC95% 13,753,043–383,467,535). More than 86% of expenditures were a result of outpatients' utilization.ConclusionCost per H1N1-patient did not defer much from seasonal influenza estimates. Hospitalizations and work absenteeism represented the highest cost per patient.
Discrete-event simulation is useful in decision-making when assessing health services. Introducing a waiting list prioritization system produced greater benefit than allocating surgery by waiting time only. Use of the simulation model would allow the impact of proposed policies to reduce waiting lists or assign resources more efficiently to be tested.
BackgroundBreast cancer (BC) causes more deaths than any other cancer among women in Catalonia. Early detection has contributed to the observed decline in BC mortality. However, there is debate on the optimal screening strategy. We performed an economic evaluation of 20 screening strategies taking into account the cost over time of screening and subsequent medical costs, including diagnostic confirmation, initial treatment, follow-up and advanced care.MethodsWe used a probabilistic model to estimate the effect and costs over time of each scenario. The effect was measured as years of life (YL), quality-adjusted life years (QALY), and lives extended (LE). Costs of screening and treatment were obtained from the Early Detection Program and hospital databases of the IMAS-Hospital del Mar in Barcelona. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to compare the relative costs and outcomes of different scenarios.ResultsStrategies that start at ages 40 or 45 and end at 69 predominate when the effect is measured as YL or QALYs. Biennial strategies 50-69, 45-69 or annual 45-69, 40-69 and 40-74 were selected as cost-effective for both effect measures (YL or QALYs). The ICER increases considerably when moving from biennial to annual scenarios. Moving from no screening to biennial 50-69 years represented an ICER of 4,469€ per QALY.ConclusionsA reduced number of screening strategies have been selected for consideration by researchers, decision makers and policy planners. Mathematical models are useful to assess the impact and costs of BC screening in a specific geographical area.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.