These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Cost-effectiveness of ceftazidime by continuous infusion versus intermittent infusion for nosocomial pneumonia.
    Author: McNabb JJ, Nightingale CH, Quintiliani R, Nicolau DP.
    Journal: Pharmacotherapy; 2001 May; 21(5):549-55. PubMed ID: 11349744.
    Abstract:
    STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine if continuous-infusion ceftazidime is more cost-effective and efficacious than intermittent infusion in patients with nosocomial pneumonia. DESIGN: Prospective, open-label, randomized trial. SETTING: Large, community teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients with nosocomial pneumonia. INTERVENTIONS: Ceftazidime 3 g/day was administered as a continuous infusion or as 2 g 3 times/day by intermittent infusion to treat nosocomial pneumonia in the ICU. Patients also received tobramycin 7 mg/kg once/day. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were evaluable; 17 received continuous infusion and 18 intermittent infusion. Clinical efficacy (94% and 83% successful outcomes with continuous and intermittent infusion, respectively), adverse events, and length of stay did not vary significantly between groups. Costs associated with continuous infusion, $627 +/- 388, were significantly lower (p < or = 0.001) than with intermittent infusion, $1007 +/- 430. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous infusion of ceftazidime is a cost-effective alternative to intermittent infusion for nosocomial pneumonia in the ICU.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]