Is Every Peripheral Catheter the Same? Economic Burden and Budget Impact of Accidents and Phlebitis in Peripheral Venous Access According to Catheter Material and Safety Device
Author(s)
Miguel F B de Medeiros, MBA1, Elisabete Buosi, NP2, Lucas Scultori, Pharmacy Student3, CRISTINA NUNES FERREIRA, Sr., MBA, MSc, PharmD3.
1Market Access, B. Braun Brazil, São Paulo, Brazil, 2Marketing, B. Braun Brazil, São Paulo, Brazil, 3Market Access, B. Braun Brazil, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
1Market Access, B. Braun Brazil, São Paulo, Brazil, 2Marketing, B. Braun Brazil, São Paulo, Brazil, 3Market Access, B. Braun Brazil, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES: To analyze the annual costs of treating phlebitis and catheter-related needle stick injuries, according to the material (Polyurethane vs. Teflon) and the presence of a safety device.
METHODS: Cost assessment of treatment (R$ 7.61) and probabilities of phlebitis (16.3% for polyurethane catheters, 53.8% for Teflon catheters) and prevalence of needle stick injuries (1/10,000 professionals for catheters with a safety device and 12.5/10,000 for catheters without a safety device; R$ 4,309.29 per event). Calculations were performed for a scenario of 600,000 catheters/year. A budget impact analysis was conducted over a 5-year horizon, with a gradual market share for polyurethane catheters with a safety device of 10% in the first year, 50% in the second, 80% in the third, 90% in the fourth, and 100% in the fifth year. The payer's perspective was considered.
RESULTS: The analysis showed a reduction of R$ 1,712,250.00 (-70%) in phlebitis treatment costs with the use of Polyurethane Catheters (R$ 744,258.00 vs. R$ 2,456,508.00) and a reduction of R$ 2,973,410.10 (-92%) in treatment costs after needle stick injuries with the use of catheters with a safety device (R$ 258,557.40 vs. R$ 3,231,967.50). Considering the budget impact, the gradual introduction of polyurethane catheters with a safety device already promotes cost reduction from the first year (-R$ 468,566.01), reaching over 15 million in 5 years.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of polyurethane peripheral venous catheters with a safety device has the potential to reduce the frequency of events and costs associated with phlebitis and needle stick injuries by nearly 5 million in one year (82% lower costs), achieving savings of over 15 million in 5 years, aligning with patient and professional safety and economic sustainability.
METHODS: Cost assessment of treatment (R$ 7.61) and probabilities of phlebitis (16.3% for polyurethane catheters, 53.8% for Teflon catheters) and prevalence of needle stick injuries (1/10,000 professionals for catheters with a safety device and 12.5/10,000 for catheters without a safety device; R$ 4,309.29 per event). Calculations were performed for a scenario of 600,000 catheters/year. A budget impact analysis was conducted over a 5-year horizon, with a gradual market share for polyurethane catheters with a safety device of 10% in the first year, 50% in the second, 80% in the third, 90% in the fourth, and 100% in the fifth year. The payer's perspective was considered.
RESULTS: The analysis showed a reduction of R$ 1,712,250.00 (-70%) in phlebitis treatment costs with the use of Polyurethane Catheters (R$ 744,258.00 vs. R$ 2,456,508.00) and a reduction of R$ 2,973,410.10 (-92%) in treatment costs after needle stick injuries with the use of catheters with a safety device (R$ 258,557.40 vs. R$ 3,231,967.50). Considering the budget impact, the gradual introduction of polyurethane catheters with a safety device already promotes cost reduction from the first year (-R$ 468,566.01), reaching over 15 million in 5 years.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of polyurethane peripheral venous catheters with a safety device has the potential to reduce the frequency of events and costs associated with phlebitis and needle stick injuries by nearly 5 million in one year (82% lower costs), achieving savings of over 15 million in 5 years, aligning with patient and professional safety and economic sustainability.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-05, ISPOR 2025, Montréal, Quebec, CA
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S1
Code
EE284
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Budget Impact Analysis, Cost/Cost of Illness/Resource Use Studies
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas