Comparative pharmacoeconomic study of vancomycin and teicoplanin in intensive care patients

Abad, F. Felices; Calbo, Francisco; Zapater, Pedro; Rodrı́guez-Vilanova, Francisco; García‐Pérez, Luis‐Emilio; Sacristán, José Antonio

doi:10.1016/s0924-8579(00)00123-0

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, a cost minimisation analysis study conducted by Abad et al suggested that vancomycin was more efficient than teicoplanin for the treatment of infections caused by Gram-positive organisms in patients in Intensive Care Units, since the efficacy and the safety of vancomycin and teicoplanin seemed similar and the global treatment costs for vancomycin were lower [32]. In the prospective cost analysis study conducted by Davey et al the mean daily costs were estimated at £52.40 (approximately 65.38 EUR) for teicoplanin and £31.13 (approximately 38.84 EUR) for vancomycin.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Vancomycin vs teicoplanin in the treatment of Gram-positive infections: a pharmacoeconomic analysis in a Turkish University Hospital

Sancar

Yeğenoğlu

Vries³

et al. 2008

Pharm World Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Vancomycin vs teicoplanin in the treatment of Gram-positive infections: a pharmacoeconomic analysis in a Turkish University Hospital

Sancar

Yeğenoğlu

Vries³

et al. 2008

Pharm World Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Esta reducción se logró principalmente a expensas de la limitación en el empleo de estos antibióticos para infecciones adquiridas en la comunidad. También es destacable la reducción de teicoplanina respecto a vancomicina justificable por la elección más frecuente de este segundo antibiótico por su menor coste y la posibilidad de medir sus niveles con carácter rutinario (18). Hay que reconocer, sin embargo que en el caso de linezolid se ha objetivado un incremento en su empleo relacionados con casos de alergia a glicopéptidos o dificultad en la obtención de una vía venosa, que podrían tener un componente coyuntural.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Optimización del tratamiento antibiótico mediante la participación de expertos en antibióticos

Martínez¹,

Rubio

Pérez³

et al. 2007

An. Med. Interna (Madrid)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The findings of our study are similar to those of a Scottish and a Spanish study that determined treatment costs based on patient records. 3,4 This indicates that the Delphi survey technique is an appropriate alternative method to analysing patient records when estimating resource utilization and costs in an economic evaluation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two studies have analysed patient records to determine resource utilisation and costs associated with treatment with teicoplanin and vancomycin. 3,4 Although such an approach has the benefit of being precise and comprehensive, it is not straightforward to link resource utilisation information contained in patient records to the drug and type of infection under study when patients receive several drugs to treat multiple comorbidities. Moreover, analysing patient records is time-and resource-intensive.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Práctica clínica y costes al tratar infecciones por catéter con teicoplanina o vancomicina

Simoens¹,

Corte

Laekeman³

2006

Pharmacy pract. (Granada Ed. impr.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To elicit actual clinical practice of treating intensive care unit patients with catheterrelated infections with teicoplanin or vancomycin from a hospital perspective. As clinical trials have demonstrated similar efficacy of these glycopeptides, a cost-minimisation analysis was also carried out. Methods: The Delphi survey technique was used to gather the opinion of nine physicians regarding resource utilization associated with teicoplanin and vancomycin. Treatment costs considered were costs of drug acquisition, costs of material and nursing time required for drug preparation and administration, and costs of laboratory tests. Results: Physicians tend to administer higher loading doses of teicoplanin than recommended in the drug information leaflet. Even though evidence of the effectiveness of vancomycin is mainly derived from trials using multiple-daily administration schedules, five physicians administered it on a once-daily basis. Mean treatment costs amounted to 1,272€ with teicoplanin and 1,041€ with vancomycin. Higher treatment costs with teicoplanin arose from more elevated drug acquisition costs (1,076€ versus 795€). Treatment with vancomycin was associated with higher costs of laboratory tests as a result of more frequent monitoring of serum concentrations (217€ versus 150€). Conclusions: This analysis of clinical practice and costs indicated that the resource utilisation advantages from fewer laboratory tests with teicoplanin partially offset higher drug acquisition costs. In addition to efficacy and costs, other factors such as route of administration, patient profile and adverse effects need to inform the choice between teicoplanin and vancomycin.

show abstract

Comparative pharmacoeconomic study of vancomycin and teicoplanin in intensive care patients

Cited by 17 publications

References 9 publications

Vancomycin vs teicoplanin in the treatment of Gram-positive infections: a pharmacoeconomic analysis in a Turkish University Hospital

Vancomycin vs teicoplanin in the treatment of Gram-positive infections: a pharmacoeconomic analysis in a Turkish University Hospital

Optimización del tratamiento antibiótico mediante la participación de expertos en antibióticos

Práctica clínica y costes al tratar infecciones por catéter con teicoplanina o vancomicina

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About