Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation of Cefoperazone/sulbactam Combined with Moxifloxacin and Amikacin versus Cefoperazone/ sulbactam Combined with Tigecycline in the Treatment of Pneumonia with Multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii Pneumonia
- VernacularTitle:头孢哌酮舒巴坦联合莫西沙星和阿米卡星对比联合替加环素治疗多重耐药鲍曼不动杆菌肺炎的药物经济学评价
- Author:
Jinglei LI
1
;
Xiangmei RUAN
1
;
Jing LIU
1
;
Jinghang JIANG
1
;
Mingwei YANG
2
;
Lin LIU
2
;
Songlin MA
3
;
Jiamin YANG
1
Author Information
1. Dept. of Pharmacy，Jingmen Second People’s Hospital，Hubei Jingmen 448000，China
2. Dept. of Respiratory Medicine，Jingmen Second People’s Hospital，Hubei Jingmen 448000，China
3. Dept. of ICU，Jingmen Second People’s Hospital，Hubei Jingmen 448000，China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii;
Pneumonia;
Cefoperazone/sulbactam;
Tigecycline;
Moxifloxacin;
Amikacin;
Cost-effectiveness analysis;
Clinical efficacy;
Pharmacoeconomics
- From:
China Pharmacy
2019;30(23):3271-3275
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE： To study the efficacy and economics of cefoperazone/sulbactam combined with moxifloxacin and amikacin versus cefoperazone/sulbactam combined with tigecycline in the treatment of pneumonia with multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii （MDRAB）. METHODS： By prospective study， 150 MDRAB pneumonia patients were selected from Jingmen Second People’s Hospital during Jan. 1st， 2016-Aug. 31st， 2019， and then randomly divided into control group and observation group， with 75 cases in each group. Control group was given Cefoperazone/sulbactam sodium for injection （3 g， q8 h， ivgtt） combined with Tigecycline for injection （first dose 100 mg， maintenance dose 50 mg， q12 h， ivgtt）. Observation group was give Cefoperazone/sulbactam sodium for injection （3 g， q8 h， ivgtt） combined with Moxifloxacin hydrochloride and sodium chloride injection （400 mg， qd， ivgtt） and Amikacin sulfate injection （0.6 g， qd， ivgtt）. The treatment lasted for 14 days in both groups. The time for body temperature to return to normal， lung rales disappearance， WBC to return to normal and PCT to return to normal， clinical efficacy， bacterial clearance rate and the occurrence of ADR were compared between 2 groups. Cost-effectiveness analysis was used to evaluate the cost- effectiveness ratio （C/E） and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio （ΔC/ΔE） of 2 groups using antibiotics cost as cost. Sensitivity analysis was performed by reducing drug cost by 15％. RESULTS： There was no statistical significance in the time for body temperature to return to normal， lung rales disappearance， WBC to return to normal and PCT to return to normal between control group and observation group （P＞0.05）. Clinical response rates of 2 groups were 85.33％ and 81.33％， and bacterial clearance rate were 89.33％ and 82.67％， with statistical significance （P＞0.05）. No serious ADR occurred in either group. The antibacterial cost of control group and observation group were 32 371.49 yuan/person and 9 367.82 yuan/person. C/E of clinical response rate were 379.37 and 115.18， and C/E of bacterial clearance rate were 362.38 and 113.32 in 2 groups， respectively. ΔC/ΔE of clinical response rate and bacterial clearance rate between control group and observation group were 5 750.92 and 3 454.00. Sensitivity analysis supported cost-effectiveness analysis results. CONCLUSIONS： Cefoperazone/sulbactam combined with moxifloxacin and amikacin versus cefoperazone/sulbactam combined with tigecycline in the treatment of pneumonia with MDRAB has similar efficacy， but cefoperazone/sulbactam combined with moxifloxacin and amikacin has economic and social benefits.
