- Dilip Nathwani, consultant physiciana,
- Peter Davey, reader in clinical pharmacology and infectious diseasesb
- a Infection and Immunodeficiency Service, King's Cross Hospital, Dundee DD3 8EA
- b Medicines Monitoring Unit, Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee DD19SY
- Accepted 26 August 1996
The NHS Executive is keen to promote “hospital at home” services in Britain, as part of its philosophy of keeping more care in the community and also to relieve the increasing demand for hospital beds. One such service is the provision of intravenous antimicrobial therapy in the community. Yet, compared with the United States, where home or outpatient intravenous antimicrobial therapy programmes are well developed, experience in Britain and Europe is limited, reflecting a difference in cultural attitudes and healthcare structures between the two continents. Only a few units in Britain currently run home intravenous antimicrobial therapy programmes, and several issues need to be addressed if more treatment is to be provided outside hospital. These include an assessment of the need for community intravenous antibiotic treatment and which patient groups many benefit. The main motive for community intravenous treatment should be better patient care and not simply a reduction in healthcare costs. At present the pace of change is being set by a few clinical enthusiasts and by commercial organisations, whereas the NHS deserves a more organised strategy for purchasing treatment with intravenous antibiotics in the community.
Following the development of the Rochester needle by Dr Thomas Massa in 1950 intravenous administration of fluids, drugs, and nutrients became common in hospitals. Over 20 years passed before the first report of community based intravenous treatment—of 13 patients with osteomyelitis.1 Further experience documented substantial financial savings to the hospital from community intravenous therapy,2 3 4 making it popular with third party payers.5 However, patients also benefited through shorter stays in hospital,6 a consequent reduction in the incidence of hospital acquired infections,7 and improvement in quality of life.5 Practical problems can be solved by selecting drugs which need to be administered only once daily,8 such as …
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record







CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Bringing Nightingale down to size
Published 29 May 2012
Re: Avoid antimuscarinic drugs in people with dementia
Published 29 May 2012
Re: Strengthening primary health care: Related to the integration of medical training, community service need and health administration
Published 29 May 2012
Re: Strengthening primary health care: Related to the integration of medical training, community service need and health administration
Published 29 May 2012
Health Literacy: Patient involvement and engagement with healthcare
Published 29 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (9 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 15:42
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27