Christian Wegner
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Christian Wegner has a total of 6 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Claudia Hübner
University of Greifswald
2 shared publications - Steffen Fleßa
University of Greifswald
2 shared publications - Andrea Tübbicke
Institute of Health Care Management, University of Greifswald, Friedrich-Loeffler-Str. 70, 17489, Greifswald, Germany
1 shared publication - Axel Kramer
University Medicine Greifswald
1 shared publication - Nils-Olaf Hübner
Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Ernst-Moritz-Arndt University, Greifswald, Germany
1 shared publication - Nils-Olaf Hübner
Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald Greifswald Germany
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 3 December 2015
- Published by Springer Nature in Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
- Vol. 4 (1) , 1-8
Impact of different diagnostic technologies for MRSA admission screening in hospitals – a decision tree analysis
Hospital infections with multiresistant bacteria, e.g., Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), cause heavy financial burden worldwide. Rapid and precise identification of MRSA carriage in combination with targeted hygienic management are proven to be effective but incur relevant extra costs. Therefore, health care providers have to decide which MRSA screening strategy and which diagnostic technology should be applied according to economic criteria. The aim of this study was to determine which MRSA admission screening and infection control management strategy causes the lowest expected cost for a hospital. Focus was set on the Point-of-Care Testing (PoC). A decision tree analytic cost model was developed, primarily based on data from peer-reviewed literature. In addition, univariate sensitivity analyses of the different input parameters were conducted to study the robustness of the results. In the basic analysis, risk-based PoC screening showed the highest mean cost savings with 14.98 € per admission in comparison to no screening. Rapid universal screening methods became favorable at high MRSA prevalence, while in situations with low MRSA transmission rates omission of screening may be favorable. Early detection of MRSA by rapid PoC or PCR technologies and consistent implementation of appropriate hygienic measures lead to high economic efficiency of MRSA management. Whether general or targeted screening is more efficient depends mainly on epidemiological and infrastructural parameters.
- 3 December 2015
- Published by Springer Nature in Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
- Vol. 4 (1) , 1-8
Open AccessImpact of different diagnostic technologies for MRSA admission screening in hospitals – a decision tree analysis
Hospital infections with multiresistant bacteria, e.g., Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), cause heavy financial burden worldwide. Rapid and precise identification of MRSA carriage in combination with targeted hygienic management are proven to be effective but incur relevant extra costs. Therefore, health care providers have to decide which MRSA screening strategy and which diagnostic technology should be applied according to economic criteria. The aim of this study was to determine which MRSA admission screening and infection control management strategy causes the lowest expected cost for a hospital. Focus was set on the Point-of-Care Testing (PoC). A decision tree analytic cost model was developed, primarily based on data from peer-reviewed literature. In addition, univariate sensitivity analyses of the different input parameters were conducted to study the robustness of the results. In the basic analysis, risk-based PoC screening showed the highest mean cost savings with 14.98 € per admission in comparison to no screening. Rapid universal screening methods became favorable at high MRSA prevalence, while in situations with low MRSA transmission rates omission of screening may be favorable. Early detection of MRSA by rapid PoC or PCR technologies and consistent implementation of appropriate hygienic measures lead to high economic efficiency of MRSA management. Whether general or targeted screening is more efficient depends mainly on epidemiological and infrastructural parameters.
- Open Access
- 1 December 2012
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Health Services Research
- Vol. 12 (1) , 438
Cost comparison of MRSA screening and management – a decision tree analysis
Background: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections represent a serious challenge for health-care institutions. Rapid and precise identification of MRSA carriers can help to reduce both nosocomial transmissions and unnecessary isolations and associated costs. The practical details of MRSA screenings (who, how, when and where to screen) remain a controversial issue. Methods: Aim of this study was to determine which MRSA screening and management strategy causes the lowest expected cost for a hospital. For this cost analysis a decision analytic cost model was developed, primary based on data from peer-reviewed literature. Single and multiplex sensitivity analyses of the parameters “costs per MRSA case per day”, “costs for pre-emptive isolation per day”, “MRSA rate of transmission not in isolation per day” and “MRSA prevalence” were conducted. Results: The omission of MRSA screening was identified as the alternative with the highest risk for the hospital. Universal MRSA screening strategies are by far more cost-intensive than targeted screening approaches. Culture confirmation of positive PCR results in combination with pre-emptive isolation generates the lowest costs for a hospital. This strategy minimizes the chance of false-positive results as well as the possibility of MRSA cross transmissions and therefore contains the costs for the hospital. These results were confirmed by multiplex and single sensitivity analyses. Single sensitivity analyses have shown that the parameters “MRSA prevalence” and the “rate of MRSA of transmission per day of non-isolated patients” exert the greatest influence on the choice of the favorite screening strategy. Conclusions: It was shown that universal MRSA screening strategies are far more cost-intensive than the targeted screening approaches. In addition, it was demonstrated that all targeted screening strategies produce lower costs than not performing a screening at all.
- 1 December 2012
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Health Services Research
- Vol. 12 (1) , 438
Open AccessCost comparison of MRSA screening and management – a decision tree analysis
Background: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections represent a serious challenge for health-care institutions. Rapid and precise identification of MRSA carriers can help to reduce both nosocomial transmissions and unnecessary isolations and associated costs. The practical details of MRSA screenings (who, how, when and where to screen) remain a controversial issue. Methods: Aim of this study was to determine which MRSA screening and management strategy causes the lowest expected cost for a hospital. For this cost analysis a decision analytic cost model was developed, primary based on data from peer-reviewed literature. Single and multiplex sensitivity analyses of the parameters “costs per MRSA case per day”, “costs for pre-emptive isolation per day”, “MRSA rate of transmission not in isolation per day” and “MRSA prevalence” were conducted. Results: The omission of MRSA screening was identified as the alternative with the highest risk for the hospital. Universal MRSA screening strategies are by far more cost-intensive than targeted screening approaches. Culture confirmation of positive PCR results in combination with pre-emptive isolation generates the lowest costs for a hospital. This strategy minimizes the chance of false-positive results as well as the possibility of MRSA cross transmissions and therefore contains the costs for the hospital. These results were confirmed by multiplex and single sensitivity analyses. Single sensitivity analyses have shown that the parameters “MRSA prevalence” and the “rate of MRSA of transmission per day of non-isolated patients” exert the greatest influence on the choice of the favorite screening strategy. Conclusions: It was shown that universal MRSA screening strategies are far more cost-intensive than the targeted screening approaches. In addition, it was demonstrated that all targeted screening strategies produce lower costs than not performing a screening at all.