OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical effectiveness and costs of teicoplanin or vancomycin use in acute hospital infections treatment from service-provider perspective in Poland. METHODS: Results of a systematic review of published clinical trials selected in accordance with Cochrane Collaboration criteria were used to assess effectiveness and safety. Systematic review was conducted in April 2006; Medline (Pubmed) Cochrane and EMBASE were searched. Only RCTs with credibility assessment of 2 or more points according to Jadad scale were included in the systematic review; relevant clinical data were pooled with RevMan 4.2. Overall costs of treatment were taken into account; pharmacotherapy and drug administration, drug monitoring, patient monitoring and adverse events influenced the total cost of treatment. CMA was used to assess savings from service-provider perspective in case of cheaper drug use in clinical practice. Sensitivity analysis was made according to range of costs of vancomycin generics available in Poland and number of days of therapy. All calculations were performed for 2006 (1Euro=3.8PLN). RESULTS: Nineteen relevant clinical trials with direct comparison of teicoplanin and vancomycin were found. Clinical effects of the drugs were similar and no significant differences in effectiveness were found in pooled data from RCTs. Teicoplanin treatment was associated with higher costs of drug acquisition compared to vancomycin (difference: 337PLN (88.7Euro) but Targocid occurred much cheaper referring to: drug level monitoring, patient monitoring and administration costs. So, overall treatment with teicoplanin occurred cheaper than vancomycin; savings from service-provider perspective were: 743.3PLN (195.6Euro) per therapy. CONCLUSION: Targocid treatment lead to significant savings for service-providers in average acute hospital infections treatment in Poland in comparison to vancomycin.