Evidence Hub

Cost-Effectiveness of Ceftriaxone and Levofloxacin Use in Pneumonia Patients at Army Hospital Indonesia

M. Husaini, E. Harfiani, S. Lardo, Hany Yusmaini

Mutiara Medika: Jurnal Kedokteran dan Kesehatan, 2025

Abstract

Pneumonia is a common respiratory tract infection worldwide and a serious issue in Indonesia, especially in Jakarta. Given the significant burden of pneumonia in Jakarta, periodic pharmacoeconomic evaluations of inpatient treatment are essential to support evidence-based policymaking. This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of levofloxacin and ceftriaxone, commonly used for pneumonia treatment. This study is an observational analysis using a cross-sectional method on 58 samples selected by a purposive sampling technique. The results indicate that levofloxacin provides more leukocyte reduction than ceftriaxone, and there were significant differences (p = 0.033). Although ceftriaxone therapy has a lower average direct medical cost than levofloxacin, there is no significant difference in the average direct medical cost of both therapies (p = 0.944). However, levofloxacin therapy has a lower Average Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ACER) value of IDR 1,410.58 compared to ceftriaxone, making it more cost-effective. Switching from ceftriaxone to levofloxacin requires an additional IDR 64.00 to reduce 1 μL of leukocyte cells. Therefore, levofloxacin is concluded to be more cost-effective for treating pneumonia patients in inpatient care at Gatot Soebroto Army Hospital, Indonesia.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free