- 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
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
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
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
The decline in the breast cancer incidence is 1.2% and it is not significant.
Published 10 February 2012
'twas ever thus
Published 10 February 2012
The value of historic human remains
Published 10 February 2012
In Praise of British Literature
Published 10 February 2012
Is real shared decision making possible?
Published 10 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (7 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (7 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
Search for evidence goes on (5 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012