Potential health and cost impacts of a point-of-care test for neonatal sepsis and possible serious bacterial infections in infants: a modeling analysis in two settings
Chevalier, J. M.; Hansen, M. A.; Grantz, K. H.; Gleeson, B.; Blumel, B.; Chuchu, V.; Khan, S.; Sigwebela, N.; Chimhini, G.; Fitzgerald, F.; Ferreyra, C.; Nichols, B. E.
Show abstract
BackgroundSepsis contributes to nearly 50% of neonatal deaths in resource-limited settings. Accurate, timely diagnosis can improve outcomes, reduce inappropriate antibiotic use, and save healthcare costs. We aimed to determine the minimum technical requirements and cost of a point-of-care test (POCT) for neonatal sepsis to be clinically effective in hospitals and community settings in low-resource settings. MethodsWe modeled the diagnosis and treatment of hospitalized neonates and infants at primary care facilities with suspected sepsis. Health outcomes (mortality, hospital stays, and healthcare-associated infections (HAIs)) were compared under empiric treatment with varied blood culture scenarios to a POCT. Test performance, bacterial infection prevalence, and discharge criteria were varied. A threshold economic analysis identified maximum allowable costs for a cost-neutral POCT. ResultsA POCT could reduce neonatal deaths significantly at hospitals (up to 19%) and community levels (up to 70%), compared to baseline, by enabling faster therapy initiation and reducing unnecessary hospitalizations and HAIs. Healthcare costs could drop by 17%-43% in hospitals and 48%-81% in primary care settings. A POCT priced at $21 for hospitals and $3 for community use could remain cost neutral. ConclusionsA POCT for neonatal sepsis, even with moderate accuracy, could improve outcomes by accelerating diagnosis, supporting antibiotic stewardship, and lowering costs. High sensitivity is essential to minimize deaths from missed diagnoses and delayed antibiotic therapy. Our results suggest 85% sensitivity and 80% specificity for hospitalized neonates and 90% sensitivity, and 70% specificity in primary care settings are the minimum necessary technical requirements for the POCT.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Derivation and external validation of a clinical prognostic model identifying children at risk of death following presentation for diarrheal care 93%
- Prediction models for post-discharge mortality among under-five children with suspected sepsis in Uganda: A multicohort analysis 92%
- Evaluating the health impact, health-system costs and cost-effectiveness of using TrueNat on stool samples compared to usual care for the diagnosis of paediatric tuberculosis in primary care settings: a modelling analysis 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Predictive Model to Identify Complicated Clostridiodes difficile Infection 92%
- Risk factors for severe COVID-19 among HIV-infected and-uninfected individuals in South Africa, April 2020- March 2022 – data from sentinel surveillance 90%
- Potential Utility of C-reactive Protein for Tuberculosis Risk Stratification among Patients with Non-Meningitic Symptoms at HIV Diagnosis in Low- and Middle-Income Countries 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Geographical validation of the Smart Triage Model by age group 94%
- Implementation of Smart Triage combined with a quality improvement program for children presenting to facilities in Kenya and Uganda: An interrupted time series analysis 93%
- External validation of a paediatric SMART triage model for use in resource limited facilities 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Reduced turnaround times through multi-sectoral collaboration during the first surge of SARS-CoV-2 in Louisiana, March-April 2020 92%
- A Sepsis Treatment Algorithm to Improve Early Antibiotic De-escalation While Maintaining Adequacy of Coverage (Early-IDEAS): A Prospective Observational Study 92%
- Ward-Level Factors Associated with Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Acquisition – an Electronic Medical Records study in Singapore 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.