You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 249 No. 10, March 11, 1983 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  ARTICLE
 This Article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA

Benefit-cost analysis of antimicrobial prophylaxis in abdominal and vaginal hysterectomy

M. Shapiro, S. C. Schoenbaum, I. B. Tager, A. Munoz and B. F. Polk

We performed a benefit-cost analysis of antimicrobial prophylaxis for hysterectomy using data from a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of the efficacy of three doses of cefazolin sodium. The excess cost per patient with either operative site or urinary tract infection, or febrile morbidity diagnosed during hospitalization, was +1,777 for vaginal and +716 for abdominal hysterectomy. In patients undergoing vaginal hysterectomy, prophylactic cefazolin reduced in-hospital infectious morbidity from 52% to 23% (preventive fraction, 56%), resulting in an average net benefit of +492 per patient. In abdominal hysterectomy, cefazolin decreased in-hospital morbidity from 43% to 25% (preventive fraction, 42%), resulting in an average net savings of +102 per patient. These benefits would be eroded by use of newer, more expensive cephalosporins unless they were considerably more effective than cefazolin. The benefits also would be diminished by inappropriate prolongation of the duration of prophylaxis.





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1983 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.