Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2000 Aug;50(457):635-9.

Management of urinary tract infection in general practice: a cost-effectiveness analysis

E A Fenwick  1 , A H Briggs, C I Hawke
Affiliations

Management of urinary tract infection in general practice: a cost-effectiveness analysis

E A Fenwick et al. Br J Gen Pract. 2000 Aug.

Abstract

Background: Symptoms associated with urinary tract infection (UTI) are common in women in general practice and represent a significant burden for the National Health Service. There is considerable variation among general practitioners in the management of patients presenting with these symptoms.

Aim: To identify the most appropriate patient management strategy given current information for non-pregnant, adult women presenting in general practice with symptoms of uncomplicated UTI.

Method: A decision analytic model incorporating a variety of patient management strategies was constructed using available published information and expert opinion. This model was able to provide guidance on current best practice based upon cost-effectiveness (cost per symptom-free day).

Results: Empiric treatment was found to be the least costly strategy available. It saved two days of symptoms per episode of UTI at a cost of 14 Pounds. The empiric-and-laboratory strategy involves an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 215 Pounds per symptom day averted per episode of UTI. The remaining patient management strategies are never optimal.

Conclusion: Empiric treatment of patients presenting with symptoms of UTI was found to be cost-effective under a range of assumptions for this patient group. However, recognition of the impact of this strategy upon antibiotic resistance may lead to the dipstick strategy being considered a superior strategy overall.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Scand J Prim Health Care. 1999 Sep;17(3):170-3 - PubMed
    1. N Engl J Med. 1977 Mar 31;296(13):716-21 - PubMed
    1. Ann Intern Med. 1985 Feb;102(2):244-9 - PubMed
    1. Health Bull (Edinb). 1987 Jan;45(1):5-10 - PubMed
    1. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1987 Mar;6(3):207-15 - PubMed

Publication types