• C Pham Dang, F Gouin, S Touchais, C Richard, and G Potel.
• Clinique chirurgicale orthopédique, Hôtel-Dieu, CHR 44093 Nantes, France. charles.phamdang@chu-nantes.fr
• Pathol. Biol. 2001 Sep 1;49(7):587-96.

AbstractThis clinical and economical study compared two glycopeptides regimen i.e., vancomycin and teicoplanin in the treatment of osteoarticular infection involving methicillin-resistant staphylococcus. After randomization, 15 patients (group 1) received vancomycin (23 F per gram) in continuous infusion through a central venous catheter and 15 others (group 2) intramuscular teicoplanin (311-357 F a 400 mg vial). The clinical study focused on treatment tolerance in an in-patient setting as well as in a non in-patient one. The cost analysis focused on total expenses including those of antibiotics, those of medical devices for antibiotic administration and those of the complications caused by the antibiotics use. Total expenses per patient averaged 8744 F with vancomycin and 8555 F with teicoplanin (NS). The apparent money saving by using a cheap antibiotic (i.e. vancomycin) was illusionary as one took in account the expenses for medical devices e.g., central venous catheters required to administer vancomycin and the complications due to the use of these devices.

73 keywords...

hide…