Cost-effectiveness study comparing cefoperazone-sulbactam to a three-drug combination for treating intraabdominal infections in an Indian health-care setting

Value in Health

Volumn 11, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2008, Pages

  Kochhar, Puja ^a,b   Suvarna, Viraj ^a   Duttagupta, Sandeep ^a   Sarkar, Shirsendu ^a  

^a PFIZER INC   (United States)

^b Pfizer Inc ^*  (India)

Author keywords

Cefoperazone sulbactam; Cost effectiveness; Intra abdominal infections; Pharmacoeconomics

Indexed keywords

AMIKACIN; CEFTAZIDIME; MAGNEX; METRONIDAZOLE; SULPERAZON; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ABDOMINAL INFECTION; ADULT; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONFERENCE PAPER; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST OF ILLNESS; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INDIA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; PHASE 4 CLINICAL TRIAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 41749115313     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00364.x     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (5)

1. World Heath Statistics 2006. Switzerland : WHO Press, 2006.
2. Healthcare in India: The Road Ahead. Confederation of Indian Industry and McKinsey, 2002.
3. Solomkin JS, Mazuski JE, Baron EJ, et al. Guidelines for the selection of anti-infective agents for complicated intra-abdominal infections. Clin Infect Dis 2003 37 : 997 1005.
4. Kochhar P. Prospective Randomized Trial of Cefoperazone-Sulbactam Versus Ceftazidime Plus Amikacin and Metronidazole in the Treatment of Intra-abdominal Infections. Indian Association of Gastrointestinal Endosurgeons (Poster) 2-9-2006.
5. Anell A, Svarvar P. Pharmacoeconomics and clinical practice guidelines: a survey of attitudes in Swedish formulary committees. PharmacoEconomics 2000 17 : 175 85.