Premium
Economic evaluation of nasogastric versus intravenous hydration in infants with bronchiolitis
Author(s) -
Oakley Ed,
Carter Rob,
Murphy Bridie,
Borland Meredith,
Neutze Jocelyn,
Acworth Jason,
Krieser David,
Dalziel Stuart,
Davidson Andrew,
Donath Susan,
Jachno Kim,
South Mike,
Babl, Franz E
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
emergency medicine australasia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.602
H-Index - 52
eISSN - 1742-6723
pISSN - 1742-6731
DOI - 10.1111/1742-6723.12713
Subject(s) - medicine , bronchiolitis , psychological intervention , intervention (counseling) , pediatrics , emergency medicine , intensive care medicine , lower respiratory tract infection , respiratory tract infections , respiratory system , nursing
Objective Bronchiolitis is the most common lower respiratory tract infection in infants and the leading cause of hospitalisation. We aimed to assess whether intravenous hydration ( IVH ) was more cost‐effective than nasogastric hydration ( NGH ) as a planned secondary economic analysis of a randomised trial involving 759 infants (aged 2–12 months) admitted to hospital with a clinical diagnosis of bronchiolitis and requiring non‐oral hydration. No Australian cost data exist to aid clinicians in decision‐making around interventions in bronchiolitis. Methods Cost data collections included hospital and intervention‐specific costs. The economic analysis was reduced to a cost‐minimisation study, focusing on intervention‐specific costs of IVH versus NGH , as length of stay was equal between groups. All analyses are reported as intention to treat. Results Intervention costs were greater for IVH than NGH ($113 vs $74; cost difference of $39 per child). The intervention‐specific cost advantage to NGH was robust to inter‐site variation in unit prices and treatment activity. Conclusion Intervention‐specific costs account for <10% of total costs of bronchiolitis admissions, with NGH having a small cost saving across all sites.