Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Safety-Engineered Devices

Haruhisa Fukuda, Kensuke Moriwaki

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To estimate the cost-effectiveness of safety-engineered devices (SEDs) relative to non-SEDs for winged steel needles, intravenous catheter stylets, suture needles, and insulin pen needles. DESIGN Decision analysis modeling. PARTICIPANTS Hypothetical cohort of healthcare workers who utilized needle devices. METHODS We developed a decision-analytic model to estimate and compare the life-cycle costs and benefits for SED and non-SED needle devices. For this cost-effectiveness analysis, we quantified the total direct medical cost per needlestick injury, number of needlestick injuries avoided, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of the base-case analysis. RESULTS In the base-case analysis, we calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of SED winged steel needles, intravenous catheter stylets, suture needles, and insulin pen needles to be $2,633, $13,943, $1,792, and $1,269 per needlestick injury avoided, respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed that the calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio values for using SEDs did not fall below zero even after adjusting the values of each parameter. CONCLUSION The use of SED needle devices would not produce cost savings for hospitals. Government intervention may be needed to systematically protect healthcare workers in Japan from the risk of bloodborne pathogen infections.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1012-1021
Number of pages10
JournalInfection Control and Hospital Epidemiology
Volume37
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 1 2016

Fingerprint

Protective Devices
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Needles
Needlestick Injuries
Equipment and Supplies
Decision Support Techniques
Steel
Sutures
Catheters
Blood-Borne Pathogens
Equipment Safety
Insulin
Delivery of Health Care
Cost Savings
Life Cycle Stages
Japan
Costs and Cost Analysis

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Epidemiology
  • Microbiology (medical)
  • Infectious Diseases

Cite this

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Safety-Engineered Devices. / Fukuda, Haruhisa; Moriwaki, Kensuke.

In: Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, Vol. 37, No. 9, 01.09.2016, p. 1012-1021.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{dc8b3c4919634664a5938f2ce330e740,
title = "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Safety-Engineered Devices",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE To estimate the cost-effectiveness of safety-engineered devices (SEDs) relative to non-SEDs for winged steel needles, intravenous catheter stylets, suture needles, and insulin pen needles. DESIGN Decision analysis modeling. PARTICIPANTS Hypothetical cohort of healthcare workers who utilized needle devices. METHODS We developed a decision-analytic model to estimate and compare the life-cycle costs and benefits for SED and non-SED needle devices. For this cost-effectiveness analysis, we quantified the total direct medical cost per needlestick injury, number of needlestick injuries avoided, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of the base-case analysis. RESULTS In the base-case analysis, we calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of SED winged steel needles, intravenous catheter stylets, suture needles, and insulin pen needles to be $2,633, $13,943, $1,792, and $1,269 per needlestick injury avoided, respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed that the calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio values for using SEDs did not fall below zero even after adjusting the values of each parameter. CONCLUSION The use of SED needle devices would not produce cost savings for hospitals. Government intervention may be needed to systematically protect healthcare workers in Japan from the risk of bloodborne pathogen infections.",
author = "Haruhisa Fukuda and Kensuke Moriwaki",
year = "2016",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/ice.2016.110",
language = "English",
volume = "37",
pages = "1012--1021",
journal = "Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology",
issn = "0899-823X",
publisher = "University of Chicago Press",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Safety-Engineered Devices

AU - Fukuda, Haruhisa

AU - Moriwaki, Kensuke

PY - 2016/9/1

Y1 - 2016/9/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE To estimate the cost-effectiveness of safety-engineered devices (SEDs) relative to non-SEDs for winged steel needles, intravenous catheter stylets, suture needles, and insulin pen needles. DESIGN Decision analysis modeling. PARTICIPANTS Hypothetical cohort of healthcare workers who utilized needle devices. METHODS We developed a decision-analytic model to estimate and compare the life-cycle costs and benefits for SED and non-SED needle devices. For this cost-effectiveness analysis, we quantified the total direct medical cost per needlestick injury, number of needlestick injuries avoided, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of the base-case analysis. RESULTS In the base-case analysis, we calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of SED winged steel needles, intravenous catheter stylets, suture needles, and insulin pen needles to be $2,633, $13,943, $1,792, and $1,269 per needlestick injury avoided, respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed that the calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio values for using SEDs did not fall below zero even after adjusting the values of each parameter. CONCLUSION The use of SED needle devices would not produce cost savings for hospitals. Government intervention may be needed to systematically protect healthcare workers in Japan from the risk of bloodborne pathogen infections.

AB - OBJECTIVE To estimate the cost-effectiveness of safety-engineered devices (SEDs) relative to non-SEDs for winged steel needles, intravenous catheter stylets, suture needles, and insulin pen needles. DESIGN Decision analysis modeling. PARTICIPANTS Hypothetical cohort of healthcare workers who utilized needle devices. METHODS We developed a decision-analytic model to estimate and compare the life-cycle costs and benefits for SED and non-SED needle devices. For this cost-effectiveness analysis, we quantified the total direct medical cost per needlestick injury, number of needlestick injuries avoided, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of the base-case analysis. RESULTS In the base-case analysis, we calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of SED winged steel needles, intravenous catheter stylets, suture needles, and insulin pen needles to be $2,633, $13,943, $1,792, and $1,269 per needlestick injury avoided, respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed that the calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio values for using SEDs did not fall below zero even after adjusting the values of each parameter. CONCLUSION The use of SED needle devices would not produce cost savings for hospitals. Government intervention may be needed to systematically protect healthcare workers in Japan from the risk of bloodborne pathogen infections.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84991448215&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84991448215&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/ice.2016.110

DO - 10.1017/ice.2016.110

M3 - Article

C2 - 27226284

AN - SCOPUS:84991448215

VL - 37

SP - 1012

EP - 1021

JO - Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology

JF - Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology

SN - 0899-823X

IS - 9

ER -