Cost-effectiveness study of cefotetan versus cefoxitin and cefotetan versus combination antibiotic regimens.
The clinical efficacy, adverse effects, cost of therapy, and administration time required to treat 141 patients were compared for cefotetan versus cefoxitin (Study A) and cefotetan versus combination antibiotic therapy (Study B). No major differences were observed in clinical efficacy or adverse effects in any of the treatment groups. Cefotetan was more cost-effective than cefoxitin, even though cefoxitin was given for shorter periods. Cefotetan was also more cost-effective than a combination of ampicillin, an aminoglycoside, and clindamycin. Although the ampicillin, aminoglycoside, and metronidazole combination appeared to be the most cost-effective regimen, this combination required the longest administration time (240 percent longer than cefotetan). Cefotetan appears to be comparably efficacious and more cost-effective than other currently used antianaerobic regimens in our institution.
D000617:Aminoglycosides; D000667:Ampicillin / Q000627:therapeutic use; D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D001424:Bacterial Infections / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000191:economics; D015313:Cefotetan; D002440:Cefoxitin / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D002513:Cephamycins / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D003365:Costs and Cost Analysis; D004359:Drug Therapy, Combination; D006801:Humans; D008795:Metronidazole / Q000627:therapeutic use; D012189:Retrospective Studies
D000617:Aminoglycosides; D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents; D002513:Cephamycins; D008795:Metronidazole; D015313:Cefotetan; D002440:Cefoxitin; D000667:Ampicillin