To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This study estimates the maximum price at which mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) therapy is deemed cost-effective for septic shock patients and identifies parameters that are most important in making treatment decisions.
We developed a probabilistic Markov model according to the sepsis care trajectory to simulate costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of septic shock patients receiving either MSC therapy or usual care over their lifetime. We calculated the therapeutic headroom by multiplying the gains attributable to MSCs with willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold and derived the maximum reimbursable price (MRP) from the expected net monetary benefit and savings attributable to MSCs. We performed scenario analyses to assess the impact of changes to assumptions on the study findings. A value of information analysis is performed to identify parameters with greatest impact on the uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness of MSC therapy.
At a WTP threshold of $50,000 per QALY, the therapeutic headroom and MRP of MSC therapy were $20,941 and $16,748, respectively; these estimates increased with the larger WTP values and the greater impact of MSCs on in-hospital mortality and hospital discharge rates. The parameters with greatest information value were MSC's impact on in-hospital mortality and the baseline septic shock in-hospital mortality.
At a common WTP of $50,000/QALY, MSC therapy is deemed to be economically attractive if its unit cost does not exceed $16,748. This ceiling price can be increased to $101,450 if the therapy significantly reduces both in-hospital mortality and increases hospital discharge rates.
We performed a return-on-investment analysis comparing the investment in surgical site infection (SSI) prevention programs in a hospital setting to the savings from averted SSI cases.
A retrospective case costing study using aggregated patient data to determine the incidence and costs of SSI infection in surgical departments over time. We calculated return on investment to the hospital and conducted several sensitivity and scenario analyses.
Data were compiled for the Ottawa Hospital (TOH), a Canadian tertiary-care teaching institution.
We used aggregated records for all hospital patients who underwent surgical procedures between April 2010 and January 2015.
We estimated the potential cost savings of the hospital’s surgical quality improvement program, namely the Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and the Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program (CUSP).
From 2010 to 2016, TOH invested C$826,882 (US$624,384) in surgical quality improvement programs targeting SSI incidence and accrued C$1,885,110 (US$1,423,460) in cumulative savings from averted SSI cases, generating a return of $2.28 (US$3.02) per dollar invested (95% confidence interval [CI], −0.67 to 7.37). The study findings are sensitive to the estimated cost to the hospital per SSI case and the rate reduction attributable to the prevention program.
The NSQIP and CUSP have produced a positive return on investment at TOH; however, the result rests on several assumptions. This positive return on investment is expected to continue if the hospital can continue to reduce SSI incidence at least 0.25% annually without new investments. Findings from this study highlight the need for continuous program evaluation of the quality improvement initiatives.
Syncope accounts for 1% of emergency department (ED) visits, yet few experience a serious adverse event (SAE). Two-thirds of syncope patients are transported to the ED by ambulance, placing considerable burden on emergency medical services (EMS), and many of these transports may be unnecessary. We estimated the proportion of syncope patients who fell into a low-risk category based on an ED diagnosis of vasovagal syncope and the absence of EMS intervention, hospitalization, or SAE.
We conducted a multicentre prospective cohort study enrolling adult syncope patients transported to the ED by ambulance over 13 months. We collected demographics and EMS interventions, and followed patients for 30 days to identify all SAE, including death, dysrhythmia, myocardial infarction, aortic dissection, pulmonary embolism, subarachnoid hemorrhage, significant hemorrhage, and related procedural interventions.
Of 990 (67.2%) patients transported to the ED by ambulance, 121 had EMS interventions, 137 suffered 30-day SAE, 393 (39.7%; 95%CI 36.6, 42.8) were deemed low risk, 41 patients with vasovagal syncope were lost to follow-up, and 298 patients were diagnosed with non-vasovagal syncope. During transport, 121 (12.2%; 95%CI 10.2, 14.3) patients underwent some EMS intervention, and 137 (14.6%; 95%CI 12.4, 16.9) suffered SAEs within 30 days.
About 40% of patients transported to the ED by ambulance are at low risk and may not benefit from paramedic care or transport to a hospital. A robust clinical decision tool would help identify patients safe for treat-and-release, diversion to alternative care, or rapid offload into low-acuity ED areas, potentially reducing EMS workload and cost.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.