Dr Pakhi Sharma1, Associate Professor Nicole M White1, Nicholas Graves2, Philip L Russo3,4, Georgia Matterson4, Katrina Browne5, Allen C Cheng6, Martin Kiernan4,7, Peta Tehan8, Andrew J Stewardson9, Professor Brett Mitchell3,4,10
1Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, 2Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, 3Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, Frankston, Victoria, Australia; Cabrini Health, Malvern, Victoria, Australia, 4School of Nursing and Health, Avondale University, Cooranbong, New South Wales, Australia, 5School of Education and Science, Avondale University, Cooranbong, New South Wales, Australia, 6Infectious Diseases, Monash Health and School of Clinical Sciences, Monash University; Clayton, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 7Richard Wells Research Centre, University of West London, Brentford, United Kingdom, 8Department of Surgery, School of Clinical Sciences, Monash University, Clayton Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 9Department of Infectious Diseases, The Alfred Hospital and Monash University School of Translational Medicine, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Centre to Impact AMR, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia, 10Central Coast Local Health District, Gosford Hospital, Gosford, New South Wales, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales Australia
Abstract:
Randomised trials are designed to produce high-quality evidence on the clinical effectiveness of new infection prevention and control (IPC) interventions. While clinical effectiveness evidence is necessary, it is equally important to consider an intervention represents good value for money to guide investment decisions. For IPC professionals, cost-effectiveness analysis can strengthen the case for investing in IPC strategies by providing information on expected costs and health benefits, compared with current policy or practice.
Our talk will use the HAPPEN study as a practical example to explain how cost-effectiveness analysis can inform resource allocation decisions in IPC. The Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia PrEveNtion (HAPPEN) trial reported that improving oral care in hospital reduces the risk of non-ventilator hospital-acquired pneumonia (NV-HAP).
We will outline the key questions addressed by the cost-effective analysis, including whether the benefits of an intervention justify its cost and how decision-makers may interpret what represents value for money. Using findings from the HAPPEN economic evaluation, we will provide a real-world example of how reductions in infections can be valued in terms of resources saved and improved patient outcomes.
By understanding and communicating economic findings, IPC professionals may be better equipped to advocate for interventions that improve patient outcomes while making efficient use of healthcare resources.