Cost-effectiveness of intensified interventions to control healthcare-associated MRSA infections -- A systematic literature review

Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus healthcare-associated infections (MRSA HAIs) are a major cause of morbidity in hospitalized patients. They pose great economic burden to hospitals caring for these patients. Intensified Interventions aim to control MRSA HAIs. Cost-effectiveness of Intensified Interventions is largely unclear. We performed a review of cost-effectiveness literature on Intensified Interventions , and provide a summary of study findings, the status of economic research in the area, and information that will help decision-makers at regional level and guide future research.^ We conducted literature search using electronic database PubMed, EBSCO, and The Cochrane Library. We limited our search to English articles published after 1999. We reviewed a total of 1,356 titles, and after applying our inclusion and exclusion criteria selected seven articles for our final review. We modified the Economic Evaluation Abstraction Form provided by CDC, and used this form to abstract data from studies.^ Of the seven selected articles two were cohort studies and the remaining five were modeling studies. They were done in various countries, in different study settings, and with different variations of the Intensified Intervention . Overall, six of the seven studies reported that Intensified Interventions were dominant or at least cost-effective in their study setting. This effect persisted on sensitivity testing.^ We identified many gaps in research in this field. The cost-effectiveness research in the field is mostly composed of modeling studies. The studies do not always clearly describe the intervention. The intervention and infection costs and the sources for these costs are not always explicit or are missing. In modeling studies, there is uncertainty associated with some key model inputs, but these inputs are not always identified. The models utilized in the modeling studies are not always tested for internal consistency or validity. Studies usually test the short term cost-effectiveness of Intensified Interventions but not the long results.^ Our study limitation was the inability to adjust for differences in study settings, intervention costs, disease costs, or effectiveness measures. Our study strength is the presentation of a focused literature review of Intensified Interventions in hospital settings. Through this study we provide information that will help decision makers at regional level, help guide future research, and might change clinical care and policies. ^