EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Pancreatic stone protein point-of-care testing can reduce healthcare expenditure in sepsis

John E. Schneider, Katherine Dick, Jacie T. Cooper () and Nadine Chami
Additional contact information
John E. Schneider: Avalon Health Economics
Katherine Dick: Avalon Health Economics
Jacie T. Cooper: Avalon Health Economics
Nadine Chami: Avalon Health Economics

Health Economics Review, 2022, vol. 12, issue 1, 1-11

Abstract: Abstract Background Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction in response to infection. Early recognition and rapid treatment are critical to patient outcomes and cost savings, but sepsis is difficult to diagnose because of its non-specific symptoms. Biomarkers such as pancreatic stone protein (PSP) offer rapid results with greater sensitivity and specificity than standard laboratory tests. Methods This study developed a decision tree model to compare a rapid PSP test to standard of care in the emergency department (ED) and intensive care unit (ICU) to diagnose patients with suspected sepsis. Key model parameters included length of hospital and ICU stay, readmission due to infection, cost of sepsis testing, length of antibiotic treatment, antibiotic resistance, and clostridium difficile infections. Model inputs were determined by review of sepsis literature. Results The rapid PSP test was found to reduce costs by $1688 per patient in the ED and $3315 per patient in the ICU compared to standard of care. Cost reductions were primarily driven by the specificity of PSP in the ED and the sensitivity of PSP in the ICU. Conclusions The results of the model indicate that PSP testing is cost saving compared to standard of care in diagnosis of sepsis. The abundance of sepsis cases in the ED and ICU make these findings important in the clinical field and further support the potential of sensitive and specific markers of sepsis to not only improve patient outcomes but also reduce healthcare expenditures.

Keywords: Sepsis; Pancreatic stone protein; Point-of-care testing; Antibiotic stewardship; Cost impact (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s13561-022-00381-z Abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:hecrev:v:12:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1186_s13561-022-00381-z

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/journal/13561

DOI: 10.1186/s13561-022-00381-z

Access Statistics for this article

Health Economics Review is currently edited by J. Matthias Graf von der Schulenburg

More articles in Health Economics Review from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().

 
Page updated 2022-07-23
Handle: RePEc:spr:hecrev:v:12:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1186_s13561-022-00381-z