Healthcare leaders ask two questions when considering a change in their testing protocols, “How will the new approach improve the quality of care? And how much will it cost?”
We understand that implementing a new test is a major undertaking. You and others in your organization may need assurance that the switch to PCT is manageable and cost-effective. Fortunately, transitioning to PCT testing need not be a leap of faith.
With B·R·A·H·M·S PCT™ (procalcitonin), the answers are clear: PCT testing leads to better clinical outcomes and lower costs. Equipped with this information, leaders can make informed decisions about including PCT in their organization's testing regimes.
Numerous studies show that PCT can provide clinical benefits while delivering significant savings by exploring the following studies:
Integrating B·R·A·H·M·S PCT into clinical decision-making can reduce initial antibiotic prescription rates and antibiotic treatment duration, which in turn lowers the likelihood of antibiotic related adverse events and length of hospitalization. PCT-aided therapy also leads to improved outcomes and reduced costs.4-8
Cost-effectiveness literature from Europe9 the Asia-Pacific region, 10-12 Latin America13, and the U.S.14,15 indicates that adding PCT testing to antibiotic stewardship protocols leads to cost savings for health care systems.
Data from U.S. healthcare systems provide an estimate of the economic impact of PCT use. The healthcare impacts were quantified and integrated into a model based analysis using a previously published health economic decision-tree model to compare the costs and effects of procalcitonin-aided care. The analysis considered the societal and hospital perspective with a time horizon covering the length of hospital stay. The main outcomes for comparison were total costs per patient—including treatment costs and productivity losses—the number of patients with antibiotic resistant or Clostridioides difficile (C. diff) infections, and costs per antibiotic day avoided.14
Results from the U.S meta-analysis results demonstrated that PCT-aided antibiotic stewardship versus standard care can lead to significant overall hospital savings: $11,311 per sepsis patient and $2,867 per LRTI patient.14
PCT-aided antibiotic stewardship can save $11,311 per sepsis patient and $2,867 per LRTI patient.14
Cost and clinical efficacy impact includes:14
Decreased C. diff rates
Decreased average length of stay
Decreased antibiotic treatment duration
Spurred by a call to action from the World Health Organization, many countries have set up national antibiotic stewardship programs. These programs encourage hospitals to improve patient safety and implement best practices for reducing rates of infection.
In conjunction with antibiotic stewardship programs, health authorities are also using surveys to track the quality of care delivered against predefined benchmarks. Moreover, some countries now include quality metrics in their hospital reimbursement criteria.
Among these quality metrics are infection rates of pathogens such as C. diff and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Using B·R·A·H·M·S PCT, hospitals are better able to lower both their sepsis and readmission rates, and as a result maintain their reimbursement revenue.
PCT proves its value in clinical trial
A recently published randomized controlled trial—Procalcitonin-Guided Antimicrobial Therapy in Sepsis (PROGRESS) —sought to determine whether PCT-aided antibiotic therapy reduced the incidence of longterm, infection-associated adverse events in cases of sepsis.17 The trial demonstrated that using PCT to aid antimicrobial treatment in sepsis patients was effective in reducing antibiotic-associated adverse events, such as antibiotic resistant infections. In addition, it was found that PCT testing lowered 28-day mortality and resulted in a median length of therapy 50% shorter than standard treatments. .17.
The study looked at patient data from the Five Rivers Medical Center in Pocahontas, Ark., and found that PCT-aided therapy led to the following cost reductions: 15
Sepsis treatment costs and productivity losses:
-$25,611 (49% reduction)
LRTI treatment costs and productivity losses:
-$3,630 (23% reduction)
The main drivers of cost reduction included length of stay, the costs of the hospital stay, and, for patients with LRTI, the percentage of patients receiving antibiotics. 15
The estimated number of patients with antibiotic-resistant infections and C. diff infections was reduced considerably—for example, among LRTI patients there was a 73.7% reduction in C. diff infections.15 No C. diff infections were reported in patients diagnosed with sepsis. It was also estimated that the number of antibioticresistant patients with sepsis and LRTI declined 8% and 17.2%, respectively. 15
*No C. diff infection patients were reported for sepsis during study period.
The cost impact of CDI
Investing in change can be daunting, but when it comes to implementing PCT-aided therapy the case for change is obvious—better antibiotic prescribing, lower rates of antibiotic resistance, fewer C. diff infections, improved patient outcomes, and lower costs.14 Is your hospital ready to move forward with PCT?