Artikel Ilmiah : G1F012059 a.n. ALIYA NURJANAH
| NIM | G1F012059 |
|---|---|
| Namamhs | ALIYA NURJANAH |
| Judul Artikel | COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS ANTIBIOTIK PROFILAKSIS SEFTRIAKSON DAN SEFOTAKSIM PADA PASIEN APENDIKTOMI DI RSUD PROF. DR. MARGONO SOEKARJO PURWOKERTO |
| Abstrak (Bhs. Indonesia) | Seftriakson dan sefotaksim merupakan antibiotik profilaksis yang sering digunakan pada apendiktomi. Seftriakson dan sefotaksim memiliki perbedaan efektivitas serta biaya. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengetahui karakteristik, outcome klinis, dan antibiotik profilaksis yang lebih cost-effective. Penelitian ini menggunakan rancangan kuantitatif non eksperimental secara retrospektif pada pasien rawat inap paska apendiktomi. Pengambilan data dari rekam medik dan keuangan di RSUD Prof. Dr. Margono Soekarjo Purwokerto dengan menggunakan teknik total purposive sampling. Perspektif yang digunakan yaitu perspektif rumah sakit. Biaya yang dianalisis berupa biaya langsung medis. Outcome klinis penelitian yaitu rata-rata lama hari kering luka dan rata-rata lama hari rawat inap. Analisis biaya menggunakan Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) dengan menghitung Average Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ACER) dan Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER). Hasil penelitian menunjukan penggunaan seftriakson sebanyak 16 pasien (69,5%) dan sefotaksim sebanyak 7 pasien (30,5%). Sefotaksim lebih efektif dibandingkan dengan seftriakson, dilihat dari rata-rata lama kering luka serta rata-rata lama rawat inap untuk seftriakson masing-masing yaitu 2,75 hari, sedangkan untuk sefotaksim masing-masing 2,57 hari. Biaya langsung medis seftriakson sebesar Rp 952.264 dan sefotaksim Rp 1.148.844. ICER per lama kering luka dan lama rawat inap sebesar Rp 1.092.111. Berdasarkan perbandingan ICER per lama kering luka dan lama rawat inap dengan nilai threshold hasilnya kurang dari 3 kali GDP per capita, maka antibiotik sefotaksim dinyatakan cost-effective. |
| Abtrak (Bhs. Inggris) | Ceftriaxone and cefotaxime are prophylactic antibiotics, which are often used to treat appendectomy. Ceftriaxone and cefotaxime have differences from its effectiveness and cost. The aims of this study were to determine the characteristics and clinical outcome of the patients, and also to determine which prophylactic antibiotic was more cost-effective. This study used a quantitative non-experimental design with retrospective way in hospitalized patients after appendectomy. Research data were taken from medical and financial records of Prof. Dr. Margono Soekarjo Purwokerto using total purposive sampling technique. The perspective was from hospital perspective. The outcomes was days of healing and length of stay. Costs included in the study was direct medical cost. The cost was evaluated with Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) and analyzed by calculating the Average Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ACER) and Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER). The results of the study showed that 16 patients (69,5%) used ceftriaxone and 7 patients (30,5%) used cefotaxime. Cefotaxime was more effective than ceftriaxone. It could be seen from the average days of wound healing and length of stay each of 2.75 days for ceftriaxone and 2.57 days for cefotaxime. Direct medical cost for ceftriaxone IDR 952.264 and for cefotaxime IDR 1,148,844. ICER IDR 1,092,111 days of healing and length of stay. Based on the comparison of ICER days of healing and length of stay time with a threshold value less than three times of the GDP per capita. Otherwise, cefotaxime was cost-effective. |
| Kata kunci | Cost-Effectiveness Analysis, Apendiktomi, Seftriakson, Sefotaksim, Infeksi Luka Operasi. |
| Pembimbing 1 | Nia Kurnia Sholihat, M.Sc., Apt. |
| Pembimbing 2 | Laksmi Maharani, M.Sc., Apt. |
| Pembimbing 3 | |
| Tahun | 2016 |
| Jumlah Halaman | 9 |
| Tgl. Entri | 2016-11-25 17:21:42.042607 |