Dataset Information

Economic Evaluation of Ultrasound-guided Central Venous Catheter Confirmation vs Chest Radiography in Critically Ill Patients: A Labor Cost Model.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Despite evidence suggesting that point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is faster and non-inferior for confirming position and excluding pneumothorax after central venous catheter (CVC) placement compared to traditional radiography, millions of chest radiographs (CXR) are performed annually for this purpose. Whether the use of POCUS results in cost savings compared to CXR is less clear but could represent a relative advantage in implementation efforts. Our objective in this study was to evaluate the labor cost difference for POCUS-guided vs CXR-guided CVC position confirmation practices.

Methods

We developed a model to evaluate the per patient difference in labor cost between POCUS-guided vs CXR-guided CVC confirmation at our local urban, tertiary academic institution. We used internal cost data from our institution to populate the variables in our model.

Results

The estimated labor cost per patient was $18.48 using CXR compared to $14.66 for POCUS, resulting in a net direct cost savings of $3.82 (21%) per patient using POCUS for CVC confirmation.

Conclusion

In this study comparing the labor costs of two approaches for CVC confirmation, the more efficient alternative (POCUS-guided) is not more expensive than traditional CXR. Performing an economic analysis framed in terms of labor costs and work efficiency may influence stakeholders and facilitate earlier adoption of POCUS for CVC confirmation.

SUBMITTER: Ablordeppey EA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9541994 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Economic Evaluation of Ultrasound-guided Central Venous Catheter Confirmation vs Chest Radiography in Critically Ill Patients: A Labor Cost Model.

Ablordeppey Enyo A EA Koenig Adam M AM Barker Abigail R AR Hernandez Emily E EE Simkovich Suzanne M SM Krings James G JG Brown Derek S DS Griffey Richard T RT

The western journal of emergency medicine 20220915 5

<h4>Introduction</h4>Despite evidence suggesting that point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is faster and non-inferior for confirming position and excluding pneumothorax after central venous catheter (CVC) placement compared to traditional radiography, millions of chest radiographs (CXR) are performed annually for this purpose. Whether the use of POCUS results in cost savings compared to CXR is less clear but could represent a relative advantage in implementation efforts. Our objective in this study ...[more]

PMID: 36205669

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the accuracy of bedside ultrasound for confirmation of central venous catheter position and exclusion of pneumothorax compared with chest radiography. DATA SOURCES:PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, reference lists, conference proceedings and ClinicalTrials.gov. STUDY SELECTION:Articles and abstracts describing the diagnostic accuracy of bedside ultrasound compared with chest radiography for confirmation of central venous catheters in sufficient detail to reconstruct 2?×?2 contingency tables were reviewed. Primary outcomes included the accuracy of confirming catheter positioning and detecting a pneumothorax. Secondary outcomes included feasibility, interrater reliability, and efficiency to complete bedside ultrasound confirmation of central venous catheter position. DATA EXTRACTION:Investigators abstracted study details including research design and sonographic imaging technique to detect catheter malposition and procedure-related pneumothorax. Diagnostic accuracy measures included pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio. DATA SYNTHESIS:Fifteen studies with 1,553 central venous catheter placements were identified with a pooled sensitivity and specificity of catheter malposition by ultrasound of 0.82 (0.77-0.86) and 0.98 (0.97-0.99), respectively. The pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios of catheter malposition by ultrasound were 31.12 (14.72-65.78) and 0.25 (0.13-0.47). The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound for pneumothorax detection was nearly 100% in the participating studies. Bedside ultrasound reduced mean central venous catheter confirmation time by 58.3 minutes. Risk of bias and clinical heterogeneity in the studies were high. CONCLUSIONS:Bedside ultrasound is faster than radiography at identifying pneumothorax after central venous catheter insertion. When a central venous catheter malposition exists, bedside ultrasound will identify four out of every five earlier than chest radiography.

Project description:ObjectiveEmerging evidence suggests that chest radiography (CXR) following central venous catheter (CVC) placement is unnecessary when point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is used to confirm catheter position and exclude pneumothorax. However, few providers have adopted this practice, and it is unknown what contributing factors may play a role in this lack of adoption, such as ultrasound experience. The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of POCUS to confirm CVC position and exclude a pneumothorax after brief education and training of nonexperts.MethodsWe performed a prospective cohort study in a single academic medical center to determine the diagnostic characteristics of a POCUS-guided CVC confirmation protocol after brief training performed by POCUS nonexperts. POCUS nonexperts (emergency medicine senior residents and critical care fellows) independently performed a POCUS-guided CVC confirmation protocol after a 30-minute didactic training. The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of the POCUS-guided CVC confirmation protocol for malposition and pneumothorax detection. Secondary outcomes were efficiency and feasibility of adequate image acquisition, adjudicated by POCUS experts.ResultsTwenty-six POCUS nonexperts collected data on 190 patients in the final analysis. There were five (2.5%) CVC malpositions and six (3%) pneumothoraxes on CXR. The positive likelihood ratios of POCUS for malposition detection and pneumothorax were 12.33 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.26 to 46.69) and 3.41 (95% CI = 0.51 to 22.76), respectively. The accuracy of POCUS for pneumothorax detection compared to CXR was 0.93 (95% CI = 0.88 to 0.96) and the sensitivity was 0.17 (95% CI = 0.00 to 0.64). The median (interquartile range) time for CVC confirmation was lower for POCUS (9 minutes [8.5-9.5 minutes]) compared to CXR (29 minutes [1-269 minutes]; Mann-Whitney U, p < 0.01). Adequate protocol image acquisition was achieved in 76% of the patients.ConclusionThirty-minute training of POCUS in nonexperts demonstrates adequate diagnostic accuracy, efficiency, and feasibility of POCUS-guided CVC position confirmation, but not exclusion of pneumothorax.

Project description:BackgroundRespiratory pathology is a major driver of mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU), even in the absence of a primary respiratory diagnosis. Prior work has demonstrated that a visual scoring system applied to chest radiographs (CXR) is associated with adverse outcomes in ICU patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). We hypothesized that a simple, semi-quantitative CXR score would be associated with clinical outcomes for the general ICU population, regardless of underlying diagnosis.MethodsAll individuals enrolled in the Registry of Critical Illness at Brigham and Women's Hospital between June 2008 and August 2018 who had a CXR within 24 h of admission were included. Each patient's CXR was assigned an opacification score of 0-4 in each of four quadrants with the total score being the sum of all four quadrants. Multivariable negative binomial, logistic, and Cox regression, adjusted for age, sex, race, immunosuppression, a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, a history of congestive heart failure, and APACHE II scores, were used to assess the total score's association with ICU length of stay (LOS), duration of mechanical ventilation, in-hospital mortality, 60-day mortality, and overall mortality, respectively.ResultsA total of 560 patients were included. Higher CXR scores were associated with increased mortality; for every one-point increase in score, in-hospital mortality increased 10% (OR 1.10, CI 1.05-1.16, p < 0.001) and 60-day mortality increased by 12% (OR 1.12, CI 1.07-1.17, p < 0.001). CXR scores were also independently associated with both ICU length of stay (rate ratio 1.06, CI 1.04-1.07, p < 0.001) and duration of mechanical ventilation (rate ratio 1.05, CI 1.02-1.07, p < 0.001).ConclusionsHigher values on a simple visual score of a patient's CXR on admission to the medical ICU are associated with increased in-hospital mortality, 60-day mortality, overall mortality, length of ICU stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation.

Project description:Critically ill patients often undergo central venous catheter placement during thrombocytopenia and/or coagulopathy. It is unclear whether severe coagulopathy increases the risk of postprocedural bleeding in critically ill patients with severe thrombocytopenia.DesignSingle-center retrospective cohort study.SettingAcademic mixed ICU in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.PatientsConsecutive severely thrombocytopenic (platelet count ≤ 50 × 109/L) patients who underwent central venous catheter placement between February 2016 and February 2020.InterventionsCentral venous catheter placement in patients with both severe thrombocytopenia and severe coagulopathy (international normalized ratio > 1.5 and/or activated partial thromboplastin time > 45 s) versus patients with severe thrombocytopenia and normal or mildly prolonged international normalized ratio and activated partial thromboplastin time.Measurements and main resultsWe included 289 central venous catheter placements in 175 patients, 112 in patients with and 172 in patients without severe coagulopathy. Median (interquartile range) platelet count was 27 (16-38) and equal for both groups. There were 44 bleeding episodes at the central venous catheter insertion site (15.5%), of which four (1.4%) were grade 2 and two (0.7%) were grade 3. There were 19 bleeding episodes (17.0%) versus 25 bleeding episodes (14.5%) in the coagulopathy and noncoagulopathy groups, of which one and five were of grade 2 or higher, respectively. After correction for confounders, coagulopathy had no effect on bleeding: odds ratio (95% CI) 0.96 (0.24-3.88). Before central venous catheter placement, 116 (40.8%) patients received platelet transfusion. Bleeding at the central venous catheter insertion site occurred in 19 of 116 patients (16.4%) and 25 of 168 patients (14.9%) who did and did not receive platelet transfusion. After correction for confounders, platelet transfusion had no effect on bleeding: odds ratio (95% CI) 0.73 (0.18-2.83).ConclusionsCoagulopathy was not associated with an increased bleeding risk in severely thrombocytopenic ICU patients undergoing ultrasound guided central venous catheter placement. Prophylactic platelet transfusion in patients with severe thrombocytopenia was not associated with a reduced risk of bleeding.

Project description:BackgroundCritically ill trauma patients with severe injuries are at high risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding simultaneously. Currently, the optimal VTE prophylaxis strategy is unknown for trauma patients with a contraindication to pharmacological prophylaxis because of a risk of bleeding.Methods and findingsUsing decision analysis, we estimated the cost effectiveness of three VTE prophylaxis strategies-pneumatic compression devices (PCDs) and expectant management alone, serial Doppler ultrasound (SDU) screening, and prophylactic insertion of a vena cava filter (VCF) -- in trauma patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) with severe injuries who were believed to have a contraindication to pharmacological prophylaxis for up to two weeks because of a risk of major bleeding. Data on the probability of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), and on the effectiveness of the prophylactic strategies, were taken from observational and randomized controlled studies. The probabilities of in-hospital death, ICU and hospital discharge rates, and resource use were taken from a population-based cohort of trauma patients with severe injuries (injury severity scores >12) admitted to the ICU of a regional trauma centre. The incidence of DVT at 12 weeks was similar for the PCD (14.9%) and SDU (15.0%) strategies, but higher for the VCF (25.7%) strategy. Conversely, the incidence of PE at 12 weeks was highest in the PCD strategy (2.9%), followed by the SDU (1.5%) and VCF (0.3%) strategies. Expected mortality and quality-adjusted life years were nearly identical for all three management strategies. Expected health care costs at 12 weeks were Can$55,831 for the PCD strategy, Can$55,334 for the SDU screening strategy, and Can$57,377 for the VCF strategy, with similar trends noted over a lifetime analysis.ConclusionsThe attributable mortality due to PE in trauma patients with severe injuries is low relative to other causes of mortality. Prophylactic placement of VCF in patients at high risk of VTE who cannot receive pharmacological prophylaxis is expensive and associated with an increased risk of DVT. Compared to the other strategies, SDU screening was associated with better clinical outcomes and lower costs.

Dataset Information

Economic Evaluation of Ultrasound-guided Central Venous Catheter Confirmation vs Chest Radiography in Critically Ill Patients: A Labor Cost Model.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Economic Evaluation of Ultrasound-guided Central Venous Catheter Confirmation vs Chest Radiography in Critically Ill Patients: A Labor Cost Model.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets