Cited by 15Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeViral gastroenteritis research and epidemiologyEmergency and Acute Care Studies

A Systematic Data Review of the Cost of Rehydration Therapy

Pershad, Jay·2010·Applied Health Economics and Health Policy

Abstract

Dehydration secondary to acute gastroenteritis is a commonly encountered condition among patients presenting to physicians' offices and hospital EDs. Treatment options consist of oral rehydration therapy (ORT), intravenous rehydration therapy (IVRT) and subcutaneous rehydration therapy (SCRT). Although most patients with dehydration can be effectively treated in an outpatient setting, hospitalization is frequently warranted, with estimated annual inpatient costs for dehydration therapy exceeding $US1 billion in the US in 1999 for elderly patients alone. Although most treatment guidelines recommend ORT as first-line treatment for mild to moderate dehydration, IVRT remains the predominant route of administration for rehydration fluids in the acute care setting in the US. To evaluate the current state of the literature examining costs associated with dehydration therapy, a systematic review of articles published on MEDLINE from 2000 to 2009 was conducted. A total of 20 reports containing pharmacoeconomic data on rehydration therapy were evaluated. Findings suggest that ORT and SCRT may be less costly than IVRT in the treatment of mild to moderate dehydration; however, variability in cost parameters examined or data collection methods described in the literature precluded a comprehensive comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment options. Future pharmacoeconomic analyses of rehydration therapy should incorporate time-motion analyses comprising a consistent set of variab…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2165/11534500-000000000-00000

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Financial costs of subcutaneous rehydration are probably lower than intravenous.

    “Another systematic review suggests that financial costs of subcutaneous rehydration are probably lower than intravenous, but the systematic review is methodologically poor and the evidence base it collates is of low quality -better-designed studies are needed (266).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pershad, J.
Affiliations
University of Tennessee Health Science Center (US)
Corresponding author
Pershad, Jay
Venue
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
Published
2010-05
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
203-214
ISSN
1175-5652 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2025411618
Cited by
15
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 2
FWCI
0.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Applied Health Economics and Health Policy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Baxter Healthcare Corporation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Viral gastroenteritis research and epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
Keywords
rehydration therapy, dehydration, acute gastroenteritis, oral rehydration therapy, treatment costs, cost-effectiveness, pharmacoeconomics, hospital costs, elderly patients
MeSH terms
Dehydration, Fluid Therapy, Hospitalization, Humans, Infusions, Intravenous, Health Care Costs, Hypodermoclysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review