Cost effectiveness analysis of parenteral nutrition therapies among hospitalised patients: multi-chamber bag system vs. compounding Online publication date: Sat, 30-Aug-2014
by Frank Xiaoqing Liu; Marc Botteman; Dipen A. Patel; Mark H. DeLegge; Catherine J. Mercaldi; Robin S. Turpin
International Journal of Healthcare Technology and Management (IJHTM), Vol. 14, No. 3, 2014
Abstract: Parenteral nutrition (PN) prepared by different methods may be associated with diverse health outcomes and treatment costs. This study used decision analysis techniques to compare the estimated costs of multi-chamber bag (MCB) PN vs. compounded PN in Canadian hospitalised patients in terms of costs and survival rates from the perspective of hospital decision makers. Model inputs were either estimated using the US Premier Perspective™ hospital database and applied to Canadian hospitalised patients or obtained from published literature. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of study results. Compared to compounded PN, MCB PN was estimated to be associated with better outcomes in terms of bacterial infections, including BSI, and patient survival, with lower total hospitalisation costs per patient.
Existing subscribers:
Go to Inderscience Online Journals to access the Full Text of this article.
If you are not a subscriber and you just want to read the full contents of this article, buy online access here.Complimentary Subscribers, Editors or Members of the Editorial Board of the International Journal of Healthcare Technology and Management (IJHTM):
Login with your Inderscience username and password:
Want to subscribe?
A subscription gives you complete access to all articles in the current issue, as well as to all articles in the previous three years (where applicable). See our Orders page to subscribe.
If you still need assistance, please email subs@inderscience.com
Our Blog 
Follow us on Twitter 
Visit us on Facebook