Cost-effectiveness of a national initiative to improve hand hygiene compliance using the outcome of healthcare associated staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia

Background The objective is to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of the Australian National Hand Hygiene Inititiave implemented between 2009 and 2012 using healthcare associated Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia as the outcome. Baseline comparators are the eight existing state and territory hand hygiene programmes. The setting is the Australian public healthcare system and 1,294,656 admissions from the 50 largest Australian hospitals are included. Methods The design is a cost-effectiveness modelling study using a before and after quasi-experimental design. The primary outcome is cost per life year saved from reduced cases of healthcare associated Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia, with cost estimated by the annual on-going maintenance costs less the costs saved from fewer infections. Data were harvested from existing sources or were collected prospectively and the time horizon for the model was 12 months, 2011–2012. Findings No useable pre-implementation Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia data were made available from the 11 study hospitals in Victoria or the single hospital in Northern Territory leaving 38 hospitals among six states and territories available for cost-effectiveness analyses. Total annual costs increased by $2,851,475 for a return of 96 years of life giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $29,700 per life year gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed a 100% chance the initiative was cost effective in the Australian Capital Territory and Queensland, with ICERs of $1,030 and $8,988 respectively. There was an 81% chance it was cost effective in New South Wales with an ICER of $33,353, a 26% chance for South Australia with an ICER of $64,729 and a 1% chance for Tasmania and Western Australia. The 12 hospitals in Victoria and the Northern Territory incur annual on-going maintenance costs of $1.51M; no information was available to describe cost savings or health benefits. Conclusions The Australian National Hand Hygiene Initiative was cost-effective against an Australian threshold of $42,000 per life year gained. The return on investment varied among the states and territories of Australia.

Change to costs and lengths of stay in the emergency department and the Brisbane protocol: An observational study

- Objective To compare health service cost and length of stay between a traditional and an accelerated diagnostic approach to assess acute coronary syndromes (ACS) among patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) of a large tertiary hospital in Australia. - Design, setting and participants This historically controlled study analysed data collected from two independent patient cohorts presenting to the ED with potential ACS. The first cohort of 938 patients was recruited in 2008–2010, and these patients were assessed using the traditional diagnostic approach detailed in the national guideline. The second cohort of 921 patients was recruited in 2011–2013 and was assessed with the accelerated diagnostic approach named the Brisbane protocol. The Brisbane protocol applied early serial troponin testing for patients at 0 and 2 h after presentation to ED, in comparison with 0 and 6 h testing in traditional assessment process. The Brisbane protocol also defined a low-risk group of patients in whom no objective testing was performed. A decision tree model was used to compare the expected cost and length of stay in hospital between two approaches. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to account for model uncertainty. - Results Compared with the traditional diagnostic approach, the Brisbane protocol was associated with reduced expected cost of $1229 (95% CI −$1266 to $5122) and reduced expected length of stay of 26 h (95% CI −14 to 136 h). The Brisbane protocol allowed physicians to discharge a higher proportion of low-risk and intermediate-risk patients from ED within 4 h (72% vs 51%). Results from sensitivity analysis suggested the Brisbane protocol had a high chance of being cost-saving and time-saving. - Conclusions This study provides some evidence of cost savings from a decision to adopt the Brisbane protocol. Benefits would arise for the hospital and for patients and their families.

What are the 'best buys' in preventing infection following caesarean section?

Caesarean section is the most common surgical procedure performed on women worldwide and infections following caesarean section occur in approximately 10% of Australian women...

Making decisions about antibiotic use in the Australian primary healthcare sector

Background Australia has one of the highest rates of antibiotic use amongst OECD countries. Data from the Australian primary healthcare sector suggests unnecessary antibiotics were prescribed for self-resolving conditions. We need to better understand what drives general practitioners (GPs) to prescribe antibiotics, consumers to seek antibiotics, and pharmacists to fill repeat antibiotic prescriptions. It is also not clear how these individuals trade-off between the possible benefits that antibiotics may provide in the immediate/short term, against the longer term societal risk of antimicrobial resistance. This project investigates what factors drive decisions to use antibiotics for GPs, pharmacists and consumers, and how these individuals discount the future. Methods Factors will be gleaned from published literature and from semi-structured interviews, to inform the development of Discrete Choice Experiments (DCEs). Three DCEs will be constructed – one for each group of interest – to allow investigation of which factors are more important in influencing (a) GPs to prescribe antibiotics, (b) consumers to seek antibiotics, and (c) pharmacists to fill legally valid but old or repeat prescriptions of antibiotics. Regression analysis will be conducted to understand the relative importance of these factors. A Time Trade Off exercise will be developed to investigate how these individuals discount the future. Results Findings from the DCEs will provide an insight into which factors are more important in driving decision making in antibiotic use for GPs, pharmacists and consumers. Findings from the Time Trade Off exercise will show what individuals are willing to trade for preserving the miracle of antibiotics. Conclusion Research findings will contribute to existing national programs to bring about a reduction in inappropriate use of antibiotic in Australia. Specifically, influencing how key messages and public health campaigns are crafted, and clinical education and empowerment of GPs and pharmacists to play a more responsive role as stewards of antibiotic use in the community.

What consumers think, do and say about antibiotic use

Objective The objectives of this study were to investigate (1) the attitudes and behaviours of Australian consumers in antibiotic use, and (2) their understanding of antibiotic resistance. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with consumers in May/June 2015. Convenience sampling was used to recruit consumers between 18–54 years old. Thirty-two consumers were interviewed. Transcripts were analysed to identify themes. Lessons Learned Dominant themes for attitudes and behaviours regarding antibiotics were (a) avoidance of antibiotic use unless clinically warranted; (b) antibiotics were useful but “weakened the body”; and (c) use of complementary medicines as adjuncts to antibiotics or to strengthen the immune system. Key information needs were (a) unambiguous instructions from GPs when prescribed antibiotics, to avoid inappropriate medicine-taking behaviour; (b) rationale for antibiotic selection; and (c) treatment duration. Antibiotic resistance was conceptualised in three ways: as a property of the body (body becomes resistant to antibiotics); the medication (antibiotic no longer effective); and the bacteria (bacteria is resistant). Antibiotic resistance was perceived as an issue that would only affect the wider community in the future, although most recognised that it is a current challenge for hospitals. Personal good health and/or avoidance of antibiotics were perceived as insurance against being adversely affected by antibiotic resistance. Implications A structured survey (discrete choice experiment) will be developed from these findings to investigate how consumers trade-off on factors influencing antibiotic use. Public health campaigns promoting conservation of antibiotics can benefit from these findings.

Preventing infections through cleaner hospitals (PITCH): An environmental cleaning bundle

Translating the numerous lengthy cleaning standards and guidelines into meaningful and sustained improvements in cleaning practice is challenging. This research hypothesized that an evidence based cleaning bundle would improve cleaning performance, knowledge and attitudes, and ultimately reduces healthcare associated infections (HAI) in a way that is value for money. A bundle is a small, straightforward set of evidence based practices, that when performed collectively and reliably, improves patient outcomes.

Improved wound management at lower costs: A sensible goal for Australia

Chronic wounds cost the Australian health system at least US$2·85 billion per year. Wound care services in Australia involve a complex mix of treatment options, health care sectors and funding mechanisms. It is clear that implementation of evidence-based wound care coincides with large health improvements and cost savings, yet the majority of Australians with chronic wounds do not receive evidence-based treatment. High initial treatment costs, inadequate reimbursement, poor financial incentives to invest in optimal care and limitations in clinical skills are major barriers to the adoption of evidence-based wound care. Enhanced education and appropriate financial incentives in primary care will improve uptake of evidence-based practice. Secondary-level wound specialty clinics to fill referral gaps in the community, boosted by appropriate credentialing, will improve access to specialist care. In order to secure funding for better services in a competitive environment, evidence of cost-effectiveness is required. Future effort to generate evidence on the cost-effectiveness of wound management interventions should provide evidence that decision makers find easy to interpret. If this happens, and it will require a large effort of health services research, it could be used to inform future policy and decision-making activities, reduce health care costs and improve patient outcomes.

Researching effective approaches to cleaning in hospitals: Protocol of the REACH study, a multi-site stepped-wedge randomised trial

Background The Researching Effective Approaches to Cleaning in Hospitals (REACH) study will generate evidence about the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a novel cleaning initiative that aims to improve the environmental cleanliness of hospitals. The initiative is an environmental cleaning bundle, with five interdependent, evidence-based components (training, technique, product, audit and communication) implemented with environmental services staff to enhance hospital cleaning practices. Methods/design The REACH study will use a stepped-wedge randomised controlled design to test the study intervention, an environmental cleaning bundle, in 11 Australian hospitals. All trial hospitals will receive the intervention and act as their own control, with analysis undertaken of the change within each hospital based on data collected in the control and intervention periods. Each site will be randomised to one of the 11 intervention timings with staggered commencement dates in 2016 and an intervention period between 20 and 50 weeks. All sites complete the trial at the same time in 2017. The inclusion criteria allow for a purposive sample of both public and private hospitals that have higher-risk patient populations for healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). The primary outcome (objective one) is the monthly number of Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemias (SABs), Clostridium difficile infections (CDIs) and vancomycin resistant enterococci (VRE) infections, per 10,000 bed days. Secondary outcomes for objective one include the thoroughness of hospital cleaning assessed using fluorescent marker technology, the bio-burden of frequent touch surfaces post cleaning and changes in staff knowledge and attitudes about environmental cleaning. A cost-effectiveness analysis will determine the second key outcome (objective two): the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio from implementation of the cleaning bundle. The study uses the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (iPARIHS) framework to support the tailored implementation of the environmental cleaning bundle in each hospital. Discussion Evidence from the REACH trial will contribute to future policy and practice guidelines about hospital environmental cleaning. It will be used by healthcare leaders and clinicians to inform decision-making and implementation of best-practice infection prevention strategies to reduce HAIs in hospitals. Trial registration Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12615000325​505

Genome-wide DNA methylation profiling of CD8+ T cells shows a distinct epigenetic signature to CD4+ T cells in multiple sclerosis patients

Background Multiple sclerosis (MS) is thought to be a T cell-mediated autoimmune disorder. MS pathogenesis is likely due to a genetic predisposition triggered by a variety of environmental factors. Epigenetics, particularly DNA methylation, provide a logical interface for environmental factors to influence the genome. In this study we aim to identify DNA methylation changes associated with MS in CD8+ T cells in 30 relapsing remitting MS patients and 28 healthy blood donors using Illumina 450K methylation arrays. Findings Seventy-nine differentially methylated CpGs were associated with MS. The methylation profile of CD8+ T cells was distinctive from our previously published data on CD4+ T cells in the same cohort. Most notably, there was no major CpG effect at the MS risk gene HLA-DRB1 locus in the CD8+ T cells. Conclusion CD8+ T cells and CD4+ T cells have distinct DNA methylation profiles. This case–control study highlights the importance of distinctive cell subtypes when investigating epigenetic changes in MS and other complex diseases.

Futility and the law: Knowledge, practice and attitudes of doctors in end of life care

Despite the potential harm to patients (and others) and the financial cost of providing futile treatment at the end of life, this practice occurs. This article reports on empirical research undertaken in Queensland that explores doctors’ perceptions about the law that governs futile treatment at the end of life, and the role it plays in medical practice. The findings reveal that doctors have poor knowledge of their legal obligations and powers when making decisions about withholding or withdrawing futile treatment at the end of life; their attitudes towards the law were largely negative; and the law affected their clinical practice and had or would cause them to provide futile treatment.

What does “futility” mean? An empirical study of doctors’ perceptions

Objective(s) To describe how doctors define and use the terms “futility” and “futile treatment” in end-of-life care. Design, Setting, Participants A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with 96 doctors across a range of specialties who treat adults at the end of life. Doctors were recruited from three large Australian teaching hospitals and were interviewed from May to July 2013. Results Doctors’ conceptions of futility focused on the quality and chance of patient benefit. Aspects of benefit included physiological effect, weighing benefits and burdens, and quantity and quality of life. Quality and length of life were linked, but many doctors discussed instances when benefit was determined by quality of life alone. Most doctors described the assessment of chance of success in achieving patient benefit as a subjective exercise. Despite a broad conceptual consensus about what futility means, doctors noted variability in how the concept was applied in clinical decision-making. Over half the doctors also identified treatment that is futile but nevertheless justified, such as short-term treatment as part of supporting the family of a dying person. Conclusions There is an overwhelming preference for a qualitative approach to assessing futility, which brings with it variation in clinical decision-making. “Patient benefit” is at the heart of doctors’ definitions of futility. Determining patient benefit requires discussions with patients and families about their values and goals as well as the burdens and benefits of further treatment.

Novel application of a discrete choice experiment to identify preferences for a national healthcare-associated infection surveillance programme: A cross-sectional study

Objective: To identify key stakeholder preferences and priorities when considering a national healthcare-associated infection (HAI) surveillance programme through the use of a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Setting: Australia does not have a national HAI surveillance programme. An online web-based DCE was developed and made available to participants in Australia. Participants: A sample of 184 purposively selected healthcare workers based on their senior leadership role in infection prevention in Australia. Primary and secondary outcomes: A DCE requiring respondents to select 1 HAI surveillance programme over another based on 5 different characteristics (or attributes) in repeated hypothetical scenarios. Data were analysed using a mixed logit model to evaluate preferences and identify the relative importance of each attribute. Results: A total of 122 participants completed the survey (response rate 66%) over a 5-week period. Excluding 22 who mismatched a duplicate choice scenario, analysis was conducted on 100 responses. The key findings included: 72% of stakeholders exhibited a preference for a surveillance programme with continuous mandatory core components (mean coefficient 0.640 (p<0.01)), 65% for a standard surveillance protocol where patient-level data are collected on infected and non-infected patients (mean coefficient 0.641 (p<0.01)), and 92% for hospital-level data that are publicly reported on a website and not associated with financial penalties (mean coefficient 1.663 (p<0.01)). Conclusions: The use of the DCE has provided a unique insight to key stakeholder priorities when considering a national HAI surveillance programme. The application of a DCE offers a meaningful method to explore and quantify preferences in this setting.