Search

Objective: To estimate whether the topical, amino acid-buffered hypochlorite debriding gel ChloraSolv (RLS Global AB, Sweden) could potentially afford the UK's health services a cost-effective intervention for hard-to-heal venous leg ulcers (VLUs)., Method: A Markov model representing the management of hard-to-heal VLUs with ChloraSolv plus standard care (SC) or SC alone was populated with inputs from an indirect comparison of two propensity score-matched cohorts. The model estimated the relative cost-effectiveness of ChloraSolv in terms of the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained at 2021/2022 prices., Results: Addition of ChloraSolv to an SC protocol was found to increase the probability of healing by 36% (from 0.14 to 0.19) after 12 weeks, and by 79% (from 0.24 to 0.43) after 24 weeks. This led to a marginal increase in health-related quality of life. Treatment with ChloraSolv plus SC instead of SC alone reduced the total cost of wound management by 8% (£189 per VLU) at 12 weeks and by 18% (£796 per VLU) at 24 weeks. Use of ChloraSolv was estimated to improve health outcomes at reduced cost. Sensitivity analysis showed that use of ChloraSolv plus SC remained a cost-effective treatment with plausible variations in costs and effectiveness., Conclusion: Within the limitations of the study, the addition of ChloraSolv to an SC protocol potentially affords a cost-effective treatment to the UK's health services for managing hard-to-heal VLUs.

Objective: To assess the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of using two different reduced pressure compression systems in treating newly diagnosed venous leg ulcers (VLUs) in clinical practice, from the perspective of the UK's National Health Service (NHS)., Methods: This was a modelling study based on a retrospective cohort analysis of the case records of patients with a newly diagnosed VLU, randomly extracted from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database, who were initially treated with a two-layer cohesive compression bandage (TLCCB Lite; Coban 2 Lite, 3M, US) or a two-layer compression system (TLCS Reduced; Ktwo Reduced, Urgo, France). No significant differences were detected between the groups. Nevertheless, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was performed to enable differences in patients' outcomes between the groups to be adjusted for any heterogeneity in baseline covariates. Clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the alternative compression systems were estimated over 12 months after starting treatment., Results: Time from wound onset to starting compression was a mean of two months. The probability of healing at 12 months was 0.59 in the TLCCB Lite group and 0.53 in the TLCS Reduced group. Patients in the TLCCB Lite group experienced a marginally better health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of 0.02 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient compared to those in the TLCS Reduced group. The 12-month NHS wound management cost was £3883 per patient treated with TLCCB Lite and £4235 per patient treated with TLCS Reduced. When the analysis was repeated without ANCOVA, the findings from the base case analysis remained unchanged (i.e., use of TLCCB Lite improved outcomes at lower cost)., Conclusion: Within the study's limitations, treating newly diagnosed VLUs with TLCCB Lite instead of TLCS Reduced potentially affords a cost-effective use of NHS-funded resources in clinical practice, since it is expected to result in an increased healing rate, better HRQoL and a lower NHS wound management cost.

Objective: To assess the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of using a two-layer cohesive compression bandage (TLCCB; Coban 2, 3M, US) compared with a two-layer compression system (TLCS; KTwo, Urgo, France) and a cohesive inelastic bandage system (CIBR; Actico, L&R, Germany) in treating newly diagnosed venous leg ulcers (VLUs) in clinical practice, from the perspective of the UK's National Health Service (NHS)., Method: This was a modelling study based on a retrospective cohort analysis of the case records of patients with a newly diagnosed VLU randomly extracted from the The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database who were treated with TLCCB, TLCS or CIBR. No significant differences were detected between the groups. Nevertheless, analysis of covariance was performed to enable differences in patients' outcomes between the groups to be adjusted for any heterogeneity in baseline covariates. Clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the alternative compression systems were estimated over 12 months after starting treatment., Results: There were 250 patients in each group. Time from wound onset to starting compression was a mean of two months. The healing distribution of the TLCCB-treated patients was significantly different from that of the other two cohorts (p=0.003); the probability of healing at 12 months was 0.62, 0.51 and 0.49 in the TLCCB, TLCS and CIBR groups, respectively. Patients treated with TLCCB experienced better health-related quality of life (HRQoL) over 12 months (0.86 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient), compared with those treated with TLCS and CIBR (0.83 and 0.82 QALYs per patient, respectively). The 12-month NHS wound management cost was £3693, £4451 and £4399 per patient in the TLCCB, TLCS and CIBR groups, respectively., Conclusion: Within the model's limitations, treating newly diagnosed VLUs with TLCCB instead of the other two compression systems appears to afford a more cost-effective use of NHS-funded resources in clinical practice, since it is expected to result in increased healing, better HRQoL and a lower wound management cost for the NHS.

Objective: To estimate whether the topical debriding agent, Debrichem, could potentially afford the UK's National Health Service (NHS) a cost-effective intervention for the management of hard-to-heal venous leg ulcers (VLUs)., Method: A Markov model was constructed depicting the management of hard-to-heal VLUs with Debrichem plus standard care (SC) or SC alone over a period of 12 months. The model was populated with inputs from an indirect comparison of two propensity score-matched cohorts. The model estimated the cost-effectiveness of the two interventions in terms of the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained at 2019/20 prices., Results: Addition of Debrichem to a SC protocol to treat hard-to-heal VLUs was found to increase the probability of healing by 75% (from 0.35 to 0.61) by 12 months, and to increase health-related quality of life over 12 months from 0.74 to 0.84 QALYs per patient. The 12-month cost of treatment with Debrichem plus SC (£3128 per patient) instead of SC alone (£7195 per patient) has the potential to reduce the total NHS cost of wound management by up to 57%. Hence, Debrichem was estimated to improve health outcomes for less cost. Sensitivity analysis showed that Debrichem plus SC remained a cost-effective (dominant) treatment with plausible variations in costs and effectiveness., Conclusion: Within the limitations of the study, the addition of Debrichem to a SC protocol potentially affords a cost-effective treatment to the NHS for managing hard-to-heal VLUs.

Objective: To estimate whether thigh-administered intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) could potentially afford the UK's National Health Service (NHS) a cost-effective intervention for the management of hard-to-heal venous leg ulcers (VLUs)., Method: A Markov model was constructed depicting the management of hard-to-heal VLUs with IPC plus standard care or standard care alone over a period of 24 weeks. The model estimated the cost-effectiveness of the two interventions in terms of the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained at 2019/20 prices., Results: Treatment of hard-to-heal VLUs with IPC plus standard care instead of standard care alone is expected to increase the probability of healing by 58% (from 0.24 to 0.38) at 24 weeks and increase health-related quality of life over 24 weeks from 0.32 to 0.34 QALYs per patient. Additionally, the cost of treating with IPC plus standard care (£3,020 per patient) instead of standard care alone (£3,037 per patient) has the potential to be cost-neutral if use of this device is stopped after 6 weeks in non-improving wounds. Sensitivity analysis showed that the relative cost-effectiveness of IPC plus standard care remains <£20,000 per QALY with plausible variations in costs and effectiveness., Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, the addition of IPC to standard care potentially affords a cost-effective treatment to the NHS for managing hard-to-heal VLUs. However, a controlled study is required to validate the outcomes of this analysis.

Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of an externally applied electroceutical (EAE) device, Accel-Heal, in treating non-healing venous leg ulcers (VLUs) in the UK., Method: This was a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-centre study of patients aged ≥18 years with a non-healing VLU. Patients were randomised in the ratio of 1:1 to receive six units of the EAE (consisting of a self-contained, programmed electric microcurrent generator and two skin contact pads) or an identical-looking placebo device over 12 consecutive days. Patients were followed-up for 24 weeks from randomisation, during which time patients received wound care according to the local standard care pathway, completed health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments, and health-care resource use was measured. The cost-effectiveness of the EAE device was estimated at 2015/16 prices in those patients who fulfilled the study's inclusion and exclusion criteria (economic analysis population)., Results: At 24 weeks after randomisation, 34% and 30% of VLUs in the EAE and placebo groups in the economic analysis population, respectively, had healed. The time-to-healing was a mean of 2.6 and 3.5 months in the EAE and placebo groups, respectively. The area of the wounds that healed in the EAE group was nearly twice that of those in the placebo group (mean: 13.3 versus 7.7cm 2 per VLU). Additionally, the pre-randomised duration of the wounds that healed in the EAE group was double that of those in the placebo group (mean: 2.6 versus 1.2 years per VLU). By the end of the study, EAE-treated patients reported less pain, more social functioning and greater overall wellbeing/satisfaction than placebo-treated patients. None of these differences reached statistical significance, but they may be important to patients. There were no significant differences in health-care resource use between the two groups. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained with the EAE device was £4480 at eight weeks, decreasing to £2265 at 16 weeks and -£2388 (dominant) at 24 weeks. The study was confounded by unwarranted variation in patient management between centres and between individual clinicians within each centre., Conclusion: Despite the unwarranted variation in the provision of wound care observed in this study, the use of the EAE device resulted in some improved clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes, for the same or less cost as standard care, by 24 weeks. Clinicians managing VLUs may wish to consider the findings from this study when making treatment decisions.

Objective: To estimate whether collagen-containing dressings could potentially afford the UK's National Health Service (NHS) a cost-effective intervention for the management of non-healing venous leg ulcers (VLUs)., Method: This was a modelling study performed from the perspective of the UK's NHS. A combination of published clinical outcomes, resource utilisation estimates and utilities for VLUs enabled the construction of a decision model, depicting the management of a chronic VLU with standard care or with a collagen-containing dressing plus compression therapy followed by standard care, over a period of 6 months. The model estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness of the two interventions in terms of the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained at 2015/16 prices., Results: The treatment of VLUs of >6 months' duration with a collagen-containing dressing plus compression therapy followed by standard care, instead of standard care, is expected to increase the probability of healing from 0.11 to 0.49 by 6 months and increase health-related quality of life at 6 months from 0.331 to 0.373 QALYs per patient. Additionally, treatment with a collagen-containing dressing plus compression therapy followed by standard care has the potential to reduce management costs by 40% over 6 months when compared with standard care (from £6328 to £3789 per patient)., Conclusion: Within the study's limitations, including a collagen-containing dressing into a standard care protocol compared with standard care potentially affords the NHS a cost-effective (dominant) treatment since it improves outcomes for less cost.

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.)

Objective: To assess clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of using a two-layer cohesive compression bandage (TLCCB; Coban 2) compared with a two-layer compression system (TLCS; KTwo) and a four-layer compression system (FLCS; Profore) in treating newly-diagnosed venous leg ulcers (VLUs) in clinical practice in the UK, from the perspective of the NHS., Method: This was a retrospective cohort analysis of the case records of patients with newly-diagnosed VLUs randomly extracted from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database (a nationally representative database of clinical practice among patients registered with general practitioners in the UK) who were treated with either TLCCB (n=200), TLCS (n=200) or FLCS (n=200). The clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the alternative compression systems were estimated over six months after starting treatment., Results: Patients' mean age was 72 years and 58% were female. Time from wound onset to the start of compression was a mean of two months, and when starting compression the wound size was a mean of 45 cm 2 . The distribution of healing was significantly different between the three groups; 76% of wounds in the TLCCB group healed by six months compared with 70% and 64% in the TLCS and FLCS groups, respectively (p=0.006). Time to healing was significantly less in the TLCCB group compared with the two other groups (p=0.003). Patients in the TLCCB group experienced better health-related quality of life over six months (0.413 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient), compared with the TLCS and FLCS groups (0.404 and 0.396 QALYs per patient, respectively). The mean six-month NHS management cost was £3045, £3842 and £4480 per patient in the TLCCB, TLCS and FLCS groups, respectively., Conclusion: Real-world evidence demonstrates that treating newly-diagnosed VLUs with TLCCB, compared with the other two compression systems, affords a more cost-effective use of NHS-funded resources in clinical practice since it resulted in an increased healing rate, better health-related quality of life and a reduction in NHS management cost.

Objective: To assess clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of using a two-layer cohesive compression bandage (TLCCB; Coban 2) compared with a two-layer compression system (TLCS; Ktwo) and a four-layer compression system (FLCS; Profore) in treating venous leg ulcers (VLUs) in clinical practice in the UK, from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS)., Method: This was a retrospective analysis of the case records of VLU patients, randomly extracted from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database (a nationally representative database of clinical practice among patients registered with general practitioners in the UK), who were treated with either TLCCB (n=250), TLCS (n=250) or FLCS (n=175). Clinical outcomes and health-care resource use (and costs) over six months after starting treatment with each compression system were estimated. Differences in outcomes and resource use between treatments were adjusted for differences in baseline covariates., Results: Patients' mean age was 75 years old and 57% were female. The mean time with a VLU was 6-7 months and the mean initial wound size was 77-85 cm2. The overall VLU healing rate, irrespective of bandage type, was 44% over the six months' study period. In the TLCCB group, 51% of wounds had healed by six months compared with 40% (p=0.03) and 28% (p=0.001) in the TLCS and FLCS groups, respectively. The mean time to healing was 2.5 months. Patients in the TLCCB group experienced better health-related quality of life (HRQoL) over six months (0.374 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient), compared with the TLCS (0.368 QALYs per patient) and FLCS (0.353 QALYs per patient). The mean six-monthly NHS management cost was £2,413, £2,707 and £2,648 per patient in the TLCCB, TLCS and FLCS groups, respectively., Conclusion: Despite the systems studied reporting similar compression levels when tested in controlled studies, real-world evidence demonstrates that initiating treatment with TLCCB, compared with the other two compression systems, affords a more cost-effective use of NHS-funded resources in clinical practice, since it resulted in an increased healing rate, better HRQoL and a reduction in NHS management cost. The evidence also highlighted the lack of continuity between clinicians managing a wound, the inconsistent nature of the administered treatments and the lack of specialist involvement, all of which may impact on healing., Declaration of Interest: This study was supported by an unrestricted research grant from 3M Health Care, UK. 3M Health Care had no influence on the study design, the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data, or on the writing of, and decision to submit for publication, the manuscript.

Objective: To evaluate the role of compression in non-healing venous leg ulcers (VLUs) of > 3 months' duration., Method: Patients' records from three independent data sets of non-healing VLUs of > 3 months'duration were re-analysed.Two data sets were separate audits of clinical practice and the third comprised patients' records from a randomised controlled trial. Some patients in each data set were never treated with compression. The effect of compression on healing at 6 months was tested with logistic regression., Results: In each data set, patients in the compression and no-compression groups were matched according to ulcer size and duration; there were no differences in comorbidities. Comparing the no-compression with the compression groups, the healing rate at 6 months was 68% vs 48% in study 1, 12% vs 6% in study 2, and 26% vs 11% in study 3. Use of compression was found to be an independent predictor of not healing with an odds ratio of 0.422, 0.456 and 0.408 in studies 1, 2 and 3 respectively., Conclusion: The healing rate of non-healing VLUs of > 3 months' duration in the no-compression groups was double that of VLUs in the compression groups. These findings have the potential for treatment modification if confirmed in a prospective trial., Declaration of Interest: There were no external sources of funding for this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this manuscript, which remains their sole responsibility.

Objective: To estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of using a sodium carboxymethylcellulose dressing (CMC [Aquacel]) and four super absorbent dressings (DryMax Extra[DM], Flivasorb [F], Kerramax [K] and sachet S [S]) in the treatment of highly exuding chronic venous leg ulcers (VLUs) in the UK, from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS)., Method: A decision model was constructed depicting the patient pathways and associated management of a cohort of 439 patients with highly exuding chronic VLUs of;;: 3 months of age. The model was based on the case records of a cohort of matched patients from The Health Improvement Network (THIN)database (a nationally representative database of patients registered with general practitioners (GPs) in the UK) who were treated with one of the five dressings. The model estimated the costs and outcomes of patient management over 6 months and the relative cost-effectiveness of using each dressing., Results: Patients' mean age was 73.1 years, and 46% were female. Between 39% and 56% ofVLUs healed by 6 months. CMC-treated wounds that remained unhealed increased in size by 43% over the study period, whereas unhealed wounds treated with the other dressings decreased in size by a mean 34%. Consequently, CMC was excluded from the cost-effectiveness analysis. The 6-monthly NHS cost of managing a VLU with S was £3700 per patient, which was 15-28% lower than the cost of managing patients with the other three super absorbents. Additionally, use of S improved patients' health status to a greater extent than the other three super absorbents, since S-treated patients accrued 0.3-3% more QALYs. Starting treatment with S was the preferred strategy followed by DM, K and Fin that order., Conclusion: Within the limitations of the data set,S affords the NHS a cost-effective treatment for managing highly exuding chronic VLUs of ≥3 months of age, compared with DM, F, K and CMC.

Objective: To estimate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of using a skin protectant (Cavilon No Sting Barrier Film [NSBF] or Cavilon Durable Barrier Cream [DBC]; 3M) compared with not using a skin protectant in the management of venous leg ulcers (VLUs), in the UK., Method: A decision model was constructed depicting the patient pathways and associated management of a cohort of patients with and without a Cavilon formulation, plus dressings and compression. The model was based on the case records of a cohort of matched patients from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database, who were first diagnosed with a VLU between 1 Jan 2008 and 31 Dec 2009. The model estimated the costs and outcomes of patient management over 6 months and the cost-effectiveness of using a Cavilon formulation relative to not using a skin protectant., Results: Patients' mean age was 80.2 years and 61% were female. Sixty-five per cent (n=166) of Cavilon patients received NSBF, and 35% received DBC. Between 6% and 9% of VLUs were healed at 6 months and 53-66% became infected. Healing was affected by a patient's age (OR: 0.944 for each additional year), but not by gender, level of exudate or wound size. There was a significantly greater reduction in wound size among patients in the NSBF group than in the other two groups (p<0.001). Additionally, there was no significant difference in the initial wound size of those VLUs that did and did not heal in the two Cavilon groups; however, initial size of the VLUs that healed in the control group was significantly smaller than those that did not (p<0.001). Resource use was similar between the three groups. Patients were predominantly managed by practice nurses, with a mean 37-38 nurse visits over the study period. Patients' dressings were changed, on average, every 4-5 days, with a mean of 3 dressings under a compression bandage. The total 6-monthly NHS cost of managing a VLU was ~£2200. Practice nurse visits were the primary cost driver, accounting for up to 58% of the 6-monthly NHS cost, whereas dressings accounted for <10% of the cost., Conclusion: Use of NSBF leads to significantly greater wound size reduction than that observed in the other two groups and may facilitate the healing of larger wounds without increasing costs. Hence, use of NSBF for peri-wound skin protection in patients with exuding VLUs is the preferred treatment strategy., Declaration of Interest: This study was sponsored by 3M Health Care, manufacturers of Cavillon NSBF and Cavillon DBC. However, the authors have no other conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this manuscript, which remains their sole responsibility.

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of using amelogenin plus compression bandaging versus compression bandaging alone in treating non-healing venous leg ulcers (VLUs) of over six months duration, from the perspective of the national health service in England., Method: A 12-month Markov model was constructed that depicted the management of a chronic, non-healing VLU of over six months duration. The model considers the decision by a clinician to treat a recalcitrant VLU with amelogenin plus compression bandaging or compression bandaging alone, and was used to estimate the relative cost-effectiveness of amelogenin plus compression bandaging at 20062007 prices., Results: According to the model, 60% of all wounds treated with amelogenin plus compression bandaging are expected to heal within 12 months of the start of treatment compared with 41% of wounds treated with compression bandaging alone (p<0.01). Additionally, 23% of all amelogenin-treated wounds are expected to improve compared with 18% of wounds in the compression bandaging alone group. This difference in effectiveness between the two groups is expected to lead to a 7% improvement in health gain among amelogenin-treated patients when compared with those treated with compression bandaging alone (0.800 versus 0.746 QALYs; p<0.01) at 12 months after the start of treatment. Use of amelogenin is expected to lead a 10% reduction in NHS cost over 12 months from pound4,261 (95% CI: pound3,409; pound5,114) to pound3,816 (95% CI: pound3,227; pound4,405), due in part to a reduction in the requirement for nurse visits. Hence, amelogenin plus compression bandaging was found to be a dominant treatment. Moreover, use of amelogenin is expected to free-up NHS resources for alternative use within the system., Conclusion: Within the models limitations, amelogenin plus compression bandaging is expected to afford the NHS a cost-effective dressing compared with compression bandaging alone in the management of chronic non-healing VLUs of more than six months duration., Declaration of Interest: This study was sponsored by Mölnlycke Heath Care. The authors have no other conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this manuscript.

Objective: To assess the cost effectiveness of using carboxymethylcellulose dressing (CMCD; Aquacel Hydrofiber) compared to gauze in the management of exuding venous leg ulcers in Germany and the USA., Design and Setting: This was a modelling study performed from the perspective of payers (i.e. the sickness funds in Germany and the community sector in the USA)., Methods: Clinical outcomes attributable to managing exuding venous leg ulcers were obtained from the published literature in the English language. These data were combined with resource utilisation estimates derived from a panel of clinicians enabling us to construct two decision models depicting the management of venous leg ulcers with CMCD or gauze over 18 weeks in Germany and the USA. The models were used to estimate the cost effectiveness of CMCD compared to gauze in the management of exuding venous leg ulcers in both countries., Main Outcome Measures and Results: Starting treatment with CMCD instead of gauze in both Germany and the USA is expected to heal 30% of ulcers within 18 weeks compared to 13% with gauze (p = 0.003). The healthcare cost of starting treatment with CMCD or gauze in Germany is expected to be Euro2020 and Euro 2654 respectively at 18 weeks. Additionally, the healthcare cost of starting treatment with CMCD or gauze in the USA is expected to be $3797 and $5288 respectively at 18 weeks. Hence, using CMCD instead of gauze is expected to increase the probability of healing within 18 weeks by 130% and reduce healthcare costs by at least 24%. The healthcare cost of managing CMCD-treated patients was less than that of gauze-treated patients in both countries due to decreased nursing and physician costs associated with a lower frequency of CMCD dressing changes compared to gauze dressing changes. If it were assumed that treatment with gauze in both countries heals 30% of ulcers within 18 weeks (i.e. is identical to CMCD), then the expected healthcare cost of using gauze would be reduced by only 3% (from Euro2654 to Euro2562 in Germany and from $5288 to $5148 in the USA)., Conclusion: Within the limitations of our model, starting management of an exuding venous leg ulcer with CMCD instead of gauze is the cost effective strategy in both Germany and the USA. Moreover, the purchase price of a leg ulcer dressing should not be used as an indication of the cost effectiveness of a given method of care.