Assessment of the costs and benefits of the use of antimicrobial copper for infection control in health care


Crane from antimicrobial copper Unique analysis of the economic aspects ofthe use of antimicrobial copper for the prevention of nosocomial infections (HCAIs) in healthcare presented on June 25, 2013 conducted by the WHO International Conference on Control and Prevention of infection (ICPIC) in Geneva. The analysis demonstrates the high efficiency and fast payback of new technical solutions.

Economic evaluation of the application is usually givendrugs or medical procedures, but in this study, the Consortium for Health Economics of York (YHEC) at the University of York in the UK subject to become the economic advantages of the use of engineering and design approaches to combat infections as a result of the deployment of the surfaces of contact of antimicrobial copper in intensive care units (ICUs) .

Pathogens causing HCAIs, can surviveenvironment for a few days or even months, allowing continuous replenishment frequent infections on surfaces touch. Durable and effective antimicrobial copper surfaces provide a technical solution, which serves as an additional line of defense against these pathogens, and this method of distribution. Bioburden on the touch surface of copper and copper alloys (ie. N. 'Antimicrobial copper) decreases continuously to a value of less than 10% of the original, as proven by clinical trials in Chile, the United Kingdom and the United States. In addition, recently published data from a study by the US Department of Defense, conducted in three different intensive care units showed that the replacement of the six most likely to touch the surfaces around the patient on the same, but because of antimicrobial copper reduces the secondary infection of hospital infections by 58%.

The study evaluated economic YHECthe effectiveness of such an intervention, compared the cost of new components with improved patient outcomes and other tangible benefits. The study allowed to draw conclusions based on the model that uses the latest information published on the efficacy of antimicrobial copper. Comparison shows a rapid return on investment in the refurbishment of the premises, namely the installation of elements of antimicrobial copper. The analysis shows the effect on the number of bed-days and the reduced number of quality life years (QALY). The model is simple, "transparent" and fully confirmed by references, and flexible settings allow you to enter data for use in the specific conditions of any health facility.

Based on typical LPUBritain, the model predicts that the cost of the replacement of the six key touch surfaces have 20 beds in intensive care units in the antimicrobial copper equivalents of pay off in less than two months due to the reduction of nosocomial infections and, as a result, reduce the time of hospitalization.

Dr. Matthew Taylor, director and one of the YHECthe report's authors, said: "... After the first two months of payback, the savings will accumulate in an obvious way and serve other useful purposes ...".

Assessment of the costs and benefits of the use of antimicrobial copper for infection control in health careIn five years, this decision will allow the coppersave nearly 2 million. pounds by reducing HCAIs compared to conventional components, if copper is installed during the construction of health facilities or scheduled maintenance. While the overall cost of the copper solutions at 30,600 pounds more than when using conventional components, calculated per patient within 5 years they will form only 94.10 pounds. Savings from reduced infection rates many times more.

In conclusion, Dr. Taylor says: It is not typical for the economic evaluation of health care, as there are additional confounding factors, and relating to the responsibility for the expenditure of budgetary funds in the hospitals. The first is a technical solution that requires budgetary costs (impact on the construction / real estate), but with a positive effect on the prevention of the spread of infection, the cost of treatment and clinical outcomes. Therefore, it requires a high degree of mutual understanding and co-operation at the highest levels of decision-making in the health system and health facilities.

Leave a reply