• Ed Oakley, Rob Carter, Bridie Murphy, Meredith Borland, Jocelyn Neutze, Jason Acworth, David Krieser, Stuart Dalziel, Andrew Davidson, Susan Donath, Kim Jachno, Mike South, Franz E Babl, and Paediatric Research in Emergency Departments International Collaborative (PREDICT).
• Department of Emergency Medicine, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
• Emerg Med Australas. 2017 Jun 1; 29 (3): 324-329.

ObjectiveBronchiolitis 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.MethodsCost 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.ResultsIntervention 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.ConclusionIntervention-specific costs account for <10% of total costs of bronchiolitis admissions, with NGH having a small cost saving across all sites.© 2016 Australasian College for Emergency Medicine and Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine.

31 keywords...

hide…