Dataset Information

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Single-Use EEG Cup Electrodes Compared with Reusable EEG Cup Electrodes.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Hospital-acquired infections are one of the most frequent adverse events among patients receiving healthcare. Reusable electroencephalography cup electrodes (EEG-CE) pose a risk of infection due to cross-contamination, which can be eliminated by replacing reusable EEG-CE with single-use EEG-CE.

Objective

The objective was to investigate the cost effectiveness of using single-use EEG-CE instead of reusable EEG-CE when the risk of sepsis is considered.

Methods

A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted, using a decision analytic model to assess the potential effects and costs of using single-use EEG-CE as an alternative to reusable EEG-CE. The cost data regarding the reusable EEG-CE were assessed through interviews with four hospitals. To identify the risk of sepsis, a retrospective observational cohort study was conducted using data from Truven Health Analytics, with a total of 73,834 patients analyzed in the USA during 1 February 2014 through 15 December 2014. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was conducted to test the impact of the variables simultaneously and the robustness of the result.

Results

The incidence of sepsis was 33 cases per 100,000 EEG procedures. The acquisition and reprocessing costs of reusable EEG-CE were $US3.25 and $US5.57, respectively. The base-case analysis showed that single-use EEG-CE are cost effective compared with reusable EEG-CE, although the decision was not robust, with the PSA showing that 40% of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios indicated that single-use EEG-CE were more effective but more expensive.

Conclusion

This study indicates single-use EEG-CE are associated with cost savings and a possible reduction in the risk of cross-contamination.

SUBMITTER: Sohrt A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6533331 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Single-Use EEG Cup Electrodes Compared with Reusable EEG Cup Electrodes.

Sohrt Anne A Mærkedahl Anders A Padula William V WV

PharmacoEconomics - open 20190601 2

<h4>Background</h4>Hospital-acquired infections are one of the most frequent adverse events among patients receiving healthcare. Reusable electroencephalography cup electrodes (EEG-CE) pose a risk of infection due to cross-contamination, which can be eliminated by replacing reusable EEG-CE with single-use EEG-CE.<h4>Objective</h4>The objective was to investigate the cost effectiveness of using single-use EEG-CE instead of reusable EEG-CE when the risk of sepsis is considered.<h4>Methods</h4>A co ...[more]

PMID: 30151817

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBoth single-use and reusable bronchoscopes are suitable for percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) to visualise the trachea during the insertion process. To determine the least costly option, the price of single-use bronchoscopes must be weighed against the estimated average cost of a bronchoscopy with reusable equipment. In the latter case, the acquisition cost must be spread over the equipment's useful life and other relevant costs, such as reprocessing and repair, must be included.ObjectiveThis study aimed to calculate the cost of using single-use or reusable bronchoscopes per PDT procedure.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies comparing the costs of reusable and single-use bronchoscopes for PDT. Inclusion criteria were articles assessing the cost of single-use or reusable bronchoscopes, and where costs were divided into acquisition, reprocessing, and repair costs. A questionnaire regarding repair rates and costs for reusable bronchoscopes was sent to 366 hospitals in the US, UK, and Germany to supplement the identified literature.ResultsEleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Ninety-nine completed responses were received, of which 31 hospitals used reusable equipment for PDT. Literature research revealed an average acquisition cost of $US135 (SD 152) and reprocessing cost of $US123 (SD 128). Additionally, a combination of data from the literature and the questionnaires gave a repair cost per use of $US148 (SD 242), resulting in a total average cost of $US406 for reusable bronchoscopes and $US249 (SD 36) for single-use bronchoscopes per PDT procedure. Thus, the incremental cost per use of a reusable bronchoscope compared with a single-use bronchoscope was $US157.ConclusionsWe conclude that significant savings can be made by using single-use bronchoscopes to guide PDT in preference to reusable bronchoscopes. Results depend on hospital setting, the reprocessing procedures, annual bronchoscope procedures, individual repair cost, and repair rates.

Project description:BackgroundBrain computer interfaces (BCI) based on electro-encephalography (EEG) have been shown to detect mental states accurately and non-invasively, but the equipment required so far is cumbersome and the resulting signal is difficult to analyze. BCI requires accurate classification of small amplitude brain signal components in single trials from recordings which can be compromised by currents induced by muscle activity.Methodology/principal findingsA novel EEG cap based on dry electrodes was developed which does not need time-consuming gel application and uses far fewer electrodes than on a standard EEG cap set-up. After optimizing the placement of the 6 dry electrodes through off-line analysis of standard cap experiments, dry cap performance was tested in the context of a well established BCI cursor control paradigm in 5 healthy subjects using analysis methods which do not necessitate user training. The resulting information transfer rate was on average about 30% slower than the standard cap. The potential contribution of involuntary muscle activity artifact to the BCI control signal was found to be inconsequential, while the detected signal was consistent with brain activity originating near the motor cortex.Conclusions/significanceOur study shows that a surprisingly simple and convenient method of brain activity imaging is possible, and that simple and robust analysis techniques exist which discriminate among mental states in single trials. Within 15 minutes the dry BCI device is set-up, calibrated and ready to use. Peak performance matched reported EEG BCI state of the art in one subject. The results promise a practical non-invasive BCI solution for severely paralyzed patients, without the bottleneck of setup effort and limited recording duration that hampers current EEG recording technique. The presented recording method itself, BCI not considered, could significantly widen the use of EEG for emerging applications requiring long-term brain activity and mental state monitoring.

Project description:ImportanceTraumatic digit amputation is the most common type of amputation injury, but the cost-effectiveness of its treatments is unknown.ObjectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of finger replantation compared with revision amputation.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation was conducted using data from the Finger Replantation and Amputation Challenges in Assessing Impairment, Satisfaction, and Effectiveness (FRANCHISE), a retrospective, multicenter cohort study at 19 centers in the United States and Asia that enrolled participants from August 1, 2016, to April 12, 2018. Model variables were based on the FRANCHISE database, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and published literature. A total of 257 participants with unilateral traumatic finger amputations treated with revision amputation or replantation distal to the metacarpophalangeal joint and at least 1 year of follow-up after treatment were included in the analysis.ExposuresRevision amputation or replantation of traumatic finger amputations.Main outcomes and measuresMain outcome measures were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), total costs (in US dollars), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). A willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY was used to assess cost-effectiveness.ResultsOf the 257 study participants (mean [SD] age, 46.7 [15.9] years; 221 [86.0%] male), 178 underwent finger replantation and 79 underwent revision amputation. In a base case of a 46.7-year-old patient, replantation was associated with QALY gains of 0.30 (95% credible interval [CrI], -0.72 to 1.38) for single-finger (not thumb), 0.39 (95% CrI, -1.00 to 1.90) for thumb, 1.69 (95% CrI, -0.13 to 3.76) for multifinger excluding thumb, and 1.27 (95% CrI, -2.21 to 5.04) for multifinger including thumb injury patterns. Corresponding ICERs for replantation compared with revision amputation were $99 157 per QALY for single-finger (not thumb), $66 278 per QALY for thumb, $18 388 per QALY for multifinger excluding thumb, and $21 528 per QALY for multifinger including thumb injury patterns. Sensitivity analysis revealed that age at time of injury, life expectancy, postinjury utility, wages, and time off work for recovery had the strongest associations with cost-effectiveness. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed the following chances of replantation being cost-effective: 47% in single-finger (not thumb), 52% in thumb, 78% in multifinger excluding thumb, and 64% in multifinger including thumb injury patterns.Conclusions and relevanceWith proper patient selection, replantation of all finger amputation patterns, whether single-finger or multifinger injuries, may be cost-effective compared with revision amputation. Multifinger replantations had a higher probability of being cost-effective than single-finger replantations. Cost-effectiveness may depend on injury pattern and patient factors and thus appears to be important for consideration when patients and surgeons are deciding whether to replant or amputate.

Project description:Recent advances in dry electrodes technology have facilitated the recording of EEG in situations not previously possible, thanks to the relatively swift electrode preparation and avoidance of applying gel to subject's hair. However, to become a true alternative, these systems should be compared to state-of-the-art wet EEG systems commonly used in clinical or research applications. In our study, we conducted a systematic comparison of electrodes application speed, subject comfort, and most critically electrophysiological signal quality between the conventional and wired Biosemi EEG system using wet active electrodes and the compact and wireless F1 EEG system consisting of dry passive electrodes. All subjects (n = 27) participated in two recording sessions on separate days, one with the wet EEG system and one with the dry EEG system, in which the session order was counterbalanced across subjects. In each session, we recorded their EEG during separate rest periods with eyes open and closed followed by two versions of a serial visual presentation target detection task. Each task component allows for a neural measure reflecting different characteristics of the data, including spectral power in canonical low frequency bands, event-related potential components (specifically, the P3b), and single trial classification based on machine learning. The performance across the two systems was similar in most measures, including the P3b amplitude and topography, as well as low frequency (theta, alpha, and beta) spectral power at rest. Both EEG systems performed well above chance in the classification analysis, with a marginal advantage of the wet system over the dry. Critically, all aforementioned electrophysiological metrics showed significant positive correlations (r = 0.54-0.89) between the two EEG systems. This multitude of measures provides a comprehensive comparison that captures different aspects of EEG data, including temporal precision, frequency domain as well as multivariate patterns of activity. Taken together, our results indicate that the dry EEG system used in this experiment can effectively record electrophysiological measures commonly used across the research and clinical contexts with comparable quality to the conventional wet EEG system.

Dataset Information

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Single-Use EEG Cup Electrodes Compared with Reusable EEG Cup Electrodes.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Single-Use EEG Cup Electrodes Compared with Reusable EEG Cup Electrodes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets