Article Text

Cost-effectiveness of a quality improvement programme to reduce central line-associated bloodstream infections in intensive care units in the USA
  1. Kurt R Herzer1,
  2. Louis Niessen2,
  3. Dagna O Constenla3,
  4. William J Ward Jr4,
  5. Peter J Pronovost5
  1. 1Medical Scientist Training Program, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
  2. 2Centre for Applied Health Research and Delivery (CAHRD), Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
  3. 3International Vaccine Access Center, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
  4. 4Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
  5. 5Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
  1. Correspondence to Kurt Herzer; kherzer{at}jhmi.edu

Abstract

Objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of a multifaceted quality improvement programme focused on reducing central line-associated bloodstream infections in intensive care units.

Design Cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision tree model to compare programme to non-programme intensive care units.

Setting USA.

Population Adult patients in the intensive care unit.

Costs Economic costs of the programme and of central line-associated bloodstream infections were estimated from the perspective of the hospital and presented in 2013 US dollars.

Main outcome measures Central line-associated bloodstream infections prevented, deaths averted due to central line-associated bloodstream infections prevented, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed.

Results Compared with current practice, the programme is strongly dominant and reduces bloodstream infections and deaths at no additional cost. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that there was an almost 80% probability that the programme reduces bloodstream infections and the infections’ economic costs to hospitals. The opportunity cost of a bloodstream infection to a hospital was the most important model parameter in these analyses.

Conclusions This multifaceted quality improvement programme, as it is currently implemented by hospitals on an increasingly large scale in the USA, likely reduces the economic costs of central line-associated bloodstream infections for US hospitals. Awareness among hospitals about the programme's benefits should enhance implementation. The programme's implementation has the potential to substantially reduce morbidity, mortality and economic costs associated with central line-associated bloodstream infections.

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Supplementary materials

  • Supplementary Data

    This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

    Files in this Data Supplement: