A Clinical Decision Analysis for Use of Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Nonabsorbable Nasal Packing

Author:

Maul Ximena12,Dincer Berkay C.34,Wu Arthur W.3,Thamboo Andrew V.1,Higgins Thomas S.5,Scangas George A.67,Oliveira Kristin8,Ho Allen S.3,Mallen-St Clair Jon3,Walgama Evan9

Affiliation:

1. Division of Otolaryngology, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

2. Department of Otolaryngology, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile

3. Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, California, USA

4. School of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

5. Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, USA

6. Department of Otolaryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

7. Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

8. Department of General Surgery, Trauma, and Surgical Critical Care, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA

9. Department of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

Abstract

Objective Nonabsorbable nasal packing is often placed for the treatment of epistaxis or after sinonasal or skull base surgery. Antibiotics are often prescribed to prevent toxic shock syndrome (TSS), a rare, potentially fatal occurrence. However, the risk of TSS must be balanced against the major risk of antibiotic use, specifically Clostridium difficile colitis (CDC). The purpose of this study is to evaluate in terms of cost-effectiveness whether antibiotics should be prescribed when nasal packing is placed. Study Design A clinical decision analysis was performed using a Markov model to evaluate whether antibiotics should be given. Setting Patients with nonabsorbable nasal packing placed. Methods Utility scores, probabilities, and costs were obtained from the literature. We assess the cost-effectiveness of antibiotic use when the risk of community-acquired CDC is balanced against the risk of TSS from nasal packing. Sensitivity analysis was performed for assumptions used in the model. Results The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for antibiotic use was 334,493 US dollars (USD)/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that not prescribing antibiotics was cost-effective in 98.0% of iterations at a willingness to pay of 50,000 USD/QALY. Sensitivity analysis showed that when the risk of CDC from antibiotics was greater than 910/100,000 or when the incidence of TSS after nasal packing was less than 49/100,000 cases, the decision to withhold antibiotics was cost-effective. Conclusions Routine antibiotic prophylaxis in the setting of nasal packing is not cost-effective and should be reconsidered. Even if antibiotics are assumed to prevent TSS, the risk of complications from antibiotic use is of greater consequence. Level of Evidence 3a

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Otorhinolaryngology,Surgery

Cited by 8 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3