Teleflex Incorporated TFX, a leading global provider of medical
devices for critical care and surgery, announced that newly published research
has reaffirmed the ability of catheters protected with ARROWg^+ard^®
Technology to reduce both bloodstream infections and direct costs associated
with treating those infections.^1
The ARROW^® CVC with ARROWg^+ard^® Technology outperformed the unprotected CVC
in both infection reduction and total cost per patient. Within the study, the
protected catheter achieved a zero infection rate per 1,000 catheter days. In
contrast, the unprotected device was associated with a much higher CRBSI rate
of 8.61/1,000 catheter days (7.4% of cases). The results were statistically
significant. Additionally, the antimicrobial protected catheter was also
associated with prolonged CRBSI-free time compared to the unprotected
catheter, including dwell times of up to 25 days without a bloodstream
infection.
The study focused only on Central Venous Catheters (CVCs) inserted into the
femoral area. The researchers compared infection rates and cost-effectiveness
of an unprotected CVC versus a catheter protected with ARROWg^+ard^®
Technology inserted into this infection-prone region. (ARROWg^+ard^®
Technology is an antimicrobial protection of chlorhexidine and silver
sulfadiazine bonded to the catheter's surface to reduce catheter-related
bloodstream infections [CRBSIs]). The research goal was to determine if the
chlorhexidine/silver sulfadiazine CVC could reduce bloodstream infection rates
and reduce the cost of diagnosing and treating an infection.
The authors undertook the study because previous cost-effectiveness analyses
of antimicrobial catheters included the cost of extended hospital stays. This
cost varies widely from institution to institution and country to country,
limiting the applicability of the results. For the current study, the authors
included only the costs of CVCs, infection diagnosis and antimicrobials used
to treat patients who developed infections. These direct expenses, they
believed, provide a clearer picture of the ultimate cost-effectiveness of the
protected, antimicrobial catheter, given its somewhat higher initial cost.
The ARROW^® CVC with ARROWg^+ard^® Technology had sharply lower CVC-related
costs than those associated with the unprotected catheter. Notably, the cost
of an ARROW^® CVC with ARROWg^+ard^® Technology was 15 times less expensive
than an unprotected catheter. (The cost per catheter day of the protected
catheter was €2.92 ± €1.77 vs. the cost of an unprotected catheter at €18.22 ±
€53.13. The cost was calculated in euros because the study was done in Spain.
As of the press release date, the conversions to dollars would be $3.48 ±
$2.11 vs. $21.70 ± $63.27.)
The study involved patients admitted to the ICU of the Hospital Universitario
de Canarias (Tenerife, Spain) who received one or more femoral venous
catheters. It examined a total of 254 catheters and 2,195 catheter days. Each
patient's physician made the decision about whether to use a protected or
unprotected catheter and whether to insert the catheter in the femoral vein.
The study was a retrospective analysis performed and published by Leonardo
Lorente, M.D., Ph.D. and colleagues independent of Teleflex. Dr. Lorente works
in the Department of Critical Care at Hospital Universitario de Canarias, in
Tenerife, Spain.
The peer‐reviewed paper appears in the October 2014 issue of the American
Journal of Infection Control, which is published by APIC, the Association for
Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology.
“We report that the antimicrobial catheter eliminated infections even though
it was used in the femoral access site, which is typically associated with
higher infection rates,” said Lorente. “This suggests the device might be
similarly effective when used in other sites with high infection risk or with
vulnerable patient populations such as immunocompromised patients.”
Lorente said the results could be helpful to other institutions, adding,
“These findings may interest hospitals who are evaluating antimicrobial
catheters to reduce their bloodstream infection rates. The fact that the
antimicrobial catheter was shown to be cost-effective should also reassure
those institutions about the economics of antimicrobial CVCs.”
“This study underscores the fact that hospitals can benefit by looking beyond
up-front costs to total treatment costs when selecting a central venous
catheter,” said Jay White, President of the Teleflex Vascular Access Division.
“In the study, the total costs of using an unprotected catheter were extremely
high because of the infections and related treatment costs. In contrast, the
ARROWg^+ard^® Technology improved both outcomes and cost-effectiveness. This
study demonstrates that Teleflex can help hospitals protect their patients and
their bottom line.”
More than 30 studies support the ability of ARROWg^+ard^® Technology to save
lives and reduce costs by reducing infections. Additional information on the
technology can be found at arrowgard.com and thearrowadvantage.com.
Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs© 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.
Comments
Loading...
Posted In: NewsPress Releases
Benzinga simplifies the market for smarter investing
Trade confidently with insights and alerts from analyst ratings, free reports and breaking news that affects the stocks you care about.
Join Now: Free!
Already a member?Sign in