Search

This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of the geko device a neuromuscular electro-stimulator technology with standard of care (SoC) versus SoC alone for venous leg ulcer (VLU) treatment, from the UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective over 12 months. Research was conducted across NHS UK facilities, primarily within community services and outpatient leg ulcer clinics, encompassing a total of 51 patients. A partitioned survival model, based on a two-arm randomised controlled trial, assessed wound healing rates using Kaplan-Meier curves and parametric extrapolations over a 12-month time horizon. Costs were derived from UK reference costs the British National Formulary, and the Personal Social Services Research Unit (2021/22). The primary outcome measured was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. The geko device provides additional benefits by stimulating the lateral popliteal nerve, augmenting venous, arterial, and microvascular flow. The addition of the geko device to SoC significantly enhanced outcomes, increasing healing probability by 68% compared to SoC. This integration would result in a cost saving of £774.14 per patient when compared to the SoC alone across the NHS. Economic analyses indicate that integrating the geko device into SoC protocols would reduce the overall NHS expenditure on VLU wound management by as much as 15%. The approach also positively impacted health-related quality of life. The geko™ device when used adjunctively with SoC would be a cost-effective method for managing chronic VLUs within the NHS, improving healing rates and offering economic benefits., (© 2024 The Author(s). International Wound Journal published by Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The aim of this study was to estimate costs associated with the management of patients with venous leg ulcers (VLUs) from the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS). The analysis was undertaken through the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank which brings together and anonymously links a wide range of person-based data from around 75% of general practitioner (GP) practices within Wales (population coverage ~2.5 million). The data covered an 11-year period from 2007 to 2017. All patients linked to the relevant codes were tracked through primary care settings, recording the number of GP practice visits (number of days with an event recorded), and wound treatment utilisation (eg, dressings, bandages, etc.) Resources were valued in monetary terms (£ sterling) and the costs were determined from national published sources of unit costs. This is the first attempt to estimate the costs of managing of VLUs using routine data sources. The direct costs to the Welsh NHS are considerable and represent 1.2% of the annual budget. Nurse visits are the main cost driver with annual estimates of £67.8 million. At a UK level, these costs amount to £1.98 billion. Dressings and compression bandages are also major cost drivers with annual Welsh estimates of £828 790. The direct cost of managing patients with VLUs is £7706 per patient per annum, which translates to an annual cost of over £2 billion, when extrapolated to the UK population. The primary cost driver is the number of district nurse visits. Initiatives to reduce healing times through improving accuracy of initial diagnosis, and improved evidence-based treatment pathways would result in major financial savings., (© 2020 The Authors. International Wound Journal published by Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Venous leg ulcers (VLUs) result in substantial economic costs and reduced quality of life (QoL); however, there are few Australian cost estimates, especially using patient-level data. We measured community-setting VLU management costs and the impact on the QoL of affected individuals. VLU patients were recruited from a specialist wound clinic, an outpatient clinic, and two community care clinics in Queensland. Cost data were collected at the baseline visit. QoL (EQ-5D-5L) and wound status data were collected at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months. Patients were classified into guideline-based/optimal care and usual care groups. Average weekly costs per patient were statistically significantly different between the usual care and optimal care groups-$214.61 and $294.72, respectively (P = 0.04). Baseline average QoL score for an unhealed ulcer was significantly higher in the optimal care group compared with usual care (P = 0.025). Time to healing differed between the usual care group and the optimal care group (P = 0.04), with averages of 3.9 and 2.7 months, respectively. These findings increase the understanding of the costs, QoL, and healing outcomes of VLU care. Higher optimal care costs may be offset by faster time to healing. This study provides data to inform an economic evaluation of guideline-based care for VLUs., (© 2018 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The aim of this study was to estimate the patterns of care and annual levels of health care resource use attributable to managing venous leg ulcers (VLUs) in clinical practice by the UK's National Health Service (NHS) and the associated costs of patient management. This was a retrospective cohort analysis of the records of 505 patients in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) Database. Patients' characteristics, wound-related health outcomes and health care resource use were quantified, and the total NHS cost of patient management was estimated at 2015/2016 prices. Overall, 53% of all VLUs healed within 12 months, and the mean time to healing was 3·0 months. 13% of patients were never prescribed any recognised compression system, and 78% of their wounds healed. Of the 87% who were prescribed a recognised compression system, 52% of wounds healed. Patients were predominantly managed in the community by nurses with minimal clinical involvement of specialist clinicians. Up to 30% of all the VLUs may have been clinically infected at the time of presentation, and only 22% of patients had an ankle brachial pressure index documented in their records. The mean NHS cost of wound care over 12 months was an estimated £7600 per VLU. However, the cost of managing an unhealed VLU was 4·5 times more than that of managing a healed VLU (£3000 per healed VLU and £13 500 per unhealed VLU). This study provides important insights into a number of aspects of VLU management in clinical practice that have been difficult to ascertain from other studies and provides the best estimate available of NHS resource use and costs with which to inform policy and budgetary decisions., (© 2017 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of an octenidine-based wound gel in the treatment of chronic venous leg ulcers. For this purpose, 49 wounds were treated with either modern wound-phase-adapted dressings alone (treatment arm 1; n = 17), octenidine wound gel plus modern wound-phase-adapted dressings (treatment arm 2; n = 17) or octenidine wound gel alone (treatment arm 3; n = 15). During the study period of 42 days with dressing changes every 3-5 days, wound healing characteristics and treatment costs of different dressings were analysed. Wound size reduction was significantly better (P = 0·028) in both octenidine wound gel treatment arms compared to modern dressings alone with total reductions of 14·6%, 64·1% and 96·2% in treatment arms 1-3. Early wound healing was merely observed under octenidine wound gel treatment (n = 9), whereby lowest treatment costs were generated by octenidine wound gel alone (€20·34/dressing change). As a result, the octenidine wound gel is cost-effective and well suitable for the treatment of chronic venous leg ulcers, considering both safety and promotion of wound healing., (© 2014 The Authors. International Wound Journal © 2014 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Although chronic wounds have a high socio-economic impact, data on comparative effectiveness of treatments are rare. UrgoStart(®) is a hydroactive dressing containing a nano-oligosaccharide factor (NOSF). This study aimed at evaluating the cost-effectiveness of this NOSF-containing wound dressing in vascular leg ulcers compared with a similar neutral foam dressing (UrgoCell(®) Contact) without NOSF. Cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the German statutory health care system was performed using a decision tree model for a period of 8 weeks. Cost and outcome data were derived from the clinical study 'Challenge' suggesting a response rate (≥40% wound size reduction) of UrgoStart(®) of 65·6% versus 39·4% for the comparator. In the treatment model, effect-adjusted costs of €849·86 were generated after 8 weeks for treatment with UrgoStart(®) versus €1335·51 for the comparator resulting in an effect-adjusted cost advantage of €485·64 for UrgoStart(®) . In linear sensitivity analyses, the outcomes were stable for varying assumptions on prices and response rates. In an 8-week period of treatment for vascular leg ulcers, UrgoStart(®) shows superior cost-effectiveness when compared with the similar neutral foam dressing without any active component (NOSF). As demonstrated within a randomised, double-blind clinical trial, UrgoStart(®) is also more effective in wound area reduction than the neutral foam dressing. Wound healing was not addressed in this clinical trial. Follow-up data of 12 months to allow for reulceration assessment were not generated., (© 2014 The Authors. International Wound Journal © 2014 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

An Excel model was developed to compare total costs (including primary and secondary dressings only) of Hydrofiber(®) ; dressing (2010 branded price) versus an alginate dressing (generic or branded price) in managing exuding venous leg ulcers considering mean wear time and mean duration of exudate management phase, from the French Social Security perspective over 5 years (2011-2015). Budget impact (based on prevalence of venous leg ulcers in France) was estimated as the difference between scenario 1 (Hydrofiber(®) ; versus alginate dressing usage proportion increasing slightly per year) and Scenario2 (proportion remaining at 2010 levels). Annual costs and net savings per patient for the dressings were calculated in analyses 1 and 2. Analysis 1 (28-day mean exudate management phase for both Hydrofiber(®) ; and alginate dressing groups): total costs 66·82€ Hydrofiber(®) ;, 70·08€ generic alginate, 77·0€ branded alginate; net savings 3·26€ and 10·18€ for Hydrofiber(®) ; versus generic and branded alginate. Analysis 2 (mean exudate management phase of 22·2 versus 28 days for Hydrofiber(®) ; versus alginate): total costs 52·92€, 70·08€ and 77·0€, and net savings 17·10€ and 24·02€, accordingly. Total cost savings (budget impact scenario 1 minus scenario 2): Analysis 1 - 223 107€ and 696 304€ for Hydrofiber(®) ; versus generic and branded alginate dressings, respectively; Analysis 2 - 1 169 845€ and 1 643 042€ accordingly. Sensitivity analyses indicated that results are reliable. This conservative analysis shows that effective exudate management using Hydrofiber(®) ; dressing can produce sizeable cost savings., (© 2012 The Authors. International Wound Journal © 2012 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The aim of the study was to determine the demand on health service utilisation and to estimate the therapeutical costs caused by patients with chronic leg ulcer (CLU) in German primary care. A population-based case-control study was conducted using electronic medical records of 116 059 patients extracted from the CONTENT primary care database of Heidelberg, Germany, between April 2007 and March 2010. The drug and non drug prescription rates among patients with CLU were analysed by means of a unified German identification key and compared with those of patients with chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) without CLU. In the 3-year-contact group, CLU patients had significantly more patient-doctor encounters (55·9 versus 40·3; p < 0·0001), more referrals to home-care services (6·12 versus 3·08; p < 0·0001), and more admissions to hospitals (0·9 versus 0·4; p < 0·0001) than CVI patients, but no difference in referrals to specialists. The annual treatment costs for drugs and non drugs in CLU patients were substantially higher than in CVI patients (1645·75 € versus 1188·17 €; p < 0·0001). Wound dressings were identified as the most cost-enlarging factor. Summarising, CLU patients in primary care settings place a higher demand on health service utilisation and need nearly one-third higher therapeutical costs compared to venous patients without ulceration., (© 2012 The Authors. International Wound Journal © 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and Medicalhelplines.com Inc.)

A study conducted in an Australian home nursing service sought to ascertain whether the provision of funding for compression bandaging and medical footwear would impact on compression therapy use, wound healing and quality of life (QoL) among people with venous leg ulcers. Clients (n = 120) were randomly allocated to evaluation funded or not evaluation funded groups, the former provided funding for compression bandaging and medical footwear. Outcome measures included the number of wounds healed, healing rate, compression use and QoL. Analysis included ttests and Kaplan-Meier Survival Analysis. An alpha level of 0·05 classified findings as significant. There were no significant differences between groups for rate or time to healing, wounds healed or compression use. The evaluation funded group were significantly more likely to receive medical footwear. Those with confirmed diagnosis and who received multilayer bandaging, irrespective of group, achieved healing rates significantly higher than those who wore other compression therapy. Factors other than cost intervened with the capacity to evaluate the impact of wound product subsidisation. Further exploration of how to best promote evidence-based practice and future research to evaluate clinically and cost-effective wound treatments in a range of health care settings is required., (© 2011 The Authors. International Wound Journal © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and Medicalhelplines.com Inc.)