In Response: "Oral versus IV treatment for catheter-related bloodstream infections - by Burke A. Cunha"
Data(s) |
2007
|
---|---|
Resumo |
In his letter Cunha suggests that oral antibiotic therapy is safer and less expensive than intravenous therapy via central venous catheters (CVCs) (1). The implication is that costs will fall and increased health benefits will be enjoyed resulting in a gain in efficiency within the healthcare system. CVCs are often used in critically ill patients to deliver antimicrobial therapy, but expose patients to a risk of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI). Our current knowledge about the efficiency (i.e. costeffectiveness) of allocating resources toward interventions that prevent CRBSI in patients requiring a CVC has already been reviewed (2). If for some patient groups antimicrobial therapy can be delivered orally, instead of through a CVC, then the costs and benefits of this alternate strategy should be evaluated... |
Formato |
application/pdf |
Identificador | |
Publicador |
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |
Relação |
http://eprints.qut.edu.au/75183/1/EID_-_Oral_v_IV.pdf http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/13/11/pdfs/07-0729.pdf Halton, Kate & Graves, Nicholas (2007) In Response: "Oral versus IV treatment for catheter-related bloodstream infections - by Burke A. Cunha". Emerging Infectious Diseases, 13(11), pp. 1800-1801. |
Direitos |
Copyright 2007 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |
Fonte |
Faculty of Health; Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation; School of Public Health & Social Work |
Palavras-Chave | #110309 Infectious Diseases #110310 Intensive Care #140208 Health Economics |
Tipo |
Journal Article |