OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy of 4 debridement alternatives in pressure ulcer management. DESIGN: Nonexperimental design combining computer modeling and a decision analysis methodology. Data input into the model were derived from a literature review of the MEDLINE database for the years 1985 to 1995 (indexing terms: pressure ulcer, decubitus, economics, cost-effectiveness, and outcome) and a Delphi consensus process with an independent panel of 9 specialists in geriatric care. SETTING: Long-term care. PATIENTS: Hypothetical elderly female resident with a new full-thickness pressure ulcer (mild odor, minimal draining, no undermining, intact periulcer skin). INTERVENTIONS: The study patient underwent 1 month of therapy with each of 4 debridement methods: autolysis, wet-to-dry dressings, collagenase (Santyl) or fibrinolysin (Elase). MAIN OUTCOME: Specific clinical outcomes (time to clean wound bed, risk of infection) and relative cost-effectiveness of each debridement method were calculated. RESULTS: The likelihood of achieving a clean wound bed at 2 weeks was 70% for collagenase, 57% for fibrinolysin, 50% for autolysis, and 30% for wet-to-dry dressings. The total cost for 1 month of treatment was $610.96 for collagenase, $920.73 for autolysis, $986.38 for fibrinolysin, and $1,008.72 for wet-to-dry dressings. CONCLUSIONS: The study patient was most likely to have a clean wound bed after 2 and 4 weeks of treatment, less likely to need to switch debridement methods, and of equal or less likelihood of experiencing and infection and subsequent hospitalization when her wound was debrided with collagenase. Treatment with collagenase also resulted in the lowest total cost of treatment. Longer term, prospective studies using actual utilization data are needed to refine these estimates of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of each product.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy of 4 debridement alternatives in pressure ulcer management. DESIGN: Nonexperimental design combining computer modeling and a decision analysis methodology. Data input into the model were derived from a literature review of the MEDLINE database for the years 1985 to 1995 (indexing terms: pressure ulcer, decubitus, economics, cost-effectiveness, and outcome) and a Delphi consensus process with an independent panel of 9 specialists in geriatric care. SETTING: Long-term care. PATIENTS: Hypothetical elderly female resident with a new full-thickness pressure ulcer (mild odor, minimal draining, no undermining, intact periulcer skin). INTERVENTIONS: The study patient underwent 1 month of therapy with each of 4 debridement methods: autolysis, wet-to-dry dressings, collagenase (Santyl) or fibrinolysin (Elase). MAIN OUTCOME: Specific clinical outcomes (time to clean wound bed, risk of infection) and relative cost-effectiveness of each debridement method were calculated. RESULTS: The likelihood of achieving a clean wound bed at 2 weeks was 70% for collagenase, 57% for fibrinolysin, 50% for autolysis, and 30% for wet-to-dry dressings. The total cost for 1 month of treatment was $610.96 for collagenase, $920.73 for autolysis, $986.38 for fibrinolysin, and $1,008.72 for wet-to-dry dressings. CONCLUSIONS: The study patient was most likely to have a clean wound bed after 2 and 4 weeks of treatment, less likely to need to switch debridement methods, and of equal or less likelihood of experiencing and infection and subsequent hospitalization when her wound was debrided with collagenase. Treatment with collagenase also resulted in the lowest total cost of treatment. Longer term, prospective studies using actual utilization data are needed to refine these estimates of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of each product.
Authors: Adrienne M Gilligan; Curtis R Waycaster; Richard Bizier; Bong-Chul Chu; Marissa J Carter; Caroline E Fife Journal: Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle) Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Amitava Das; Soma Datta; Eric Roche; Scott Chaffee; Elizabeth Jose; Lei Shi; Komel Grover; Savita Khanna; Chandan K Sen; Sashwati Roy Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-01-26 Impact factor: 4.379