Literature DB >> 16110713

Cost-effectiveness of pressure-relieving devices for the prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers.

Rachael L Fleurence1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The cost-effectiveness of alternating pressure-relieving devices, mattress replacements, and mattress overlays compared with a standard hospital (high-specification foam mattress) for the prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers in hospital patients in the United Kingdom was investigated.
METHODS: A decision-analytic model was constructed to evaluate different strategies to prevent or treat pressure ulcers. Three scenarios were evaluated: the prevention of pressure ulcers, the treatment of superficial ulcers, and the treatment of severe ulcers. Epidemiological and effectiveness data were obtained from the clinical literature. Expert opinion using a rating scale technique was used to obtain quality of life data. Costs of the devices were obtained from manufacturers, whereas costs of treatment were obtained from the literature. Uncertainty was explored through probabilistic sensitivity analysis.
RESULTS: Using 30,000 pounds sterling/QALY (quality-adjusted life year) as the decision-maker's cut off point (the current UK standard), in scenario 1 (prevention), the cost-effective strategy was the mattress overlay at 1, 4, and 12 weeks. In scenarios 2 and 3, the cost-effective strategy was the mattress replacement at 1, 4, and 12 weeks. Standard care was a dominated intervention in all scenarios for values of the decision-maker's ceiling ratio ranging from 5,000 pounds sterling to 100,000 pounds sterling/QALY. However, the probabilistic sensitivity analysis results reflected the high uncertainty surrounding the choice of devices.
CONCLUSIONS: Current information suggests that alternating pressure mattress overlays may be cost-effective for the prevention of pressure ulcers, whereas alternating pressure mattress replacements appears to be cost-effective for the treatment of superficial and severe pressure ulcers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16110713     DOI: 10.1017/s0266462305050440

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care        ISSN: 0266-4623            Impact factor:   2.188


  8 in total

1.  The economics of pressure relieving surfaces: an illustrative case study of the impact of high-specification surfaces on hospital finances.

Authors:  Paul Trueman; Sarah J Whitehead
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.315

Review 2.  Improved wound management at lower cost: a sensible goal for Australia.

Authors:  Rosana E Norman; Michelle Gibb; Anthony Dyer; Jennifer Prentice; Stephen Yelland; Qinglu Cheng; Peter A Lazzarini; Keryln Carville; Karen Innes-Walker; Kathleen Finlayson; Helen Edwards; Edward Burn; Nicholas Graves
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2015-12-03       Impact factor: 3.315

3.  Pressure relieving support surfaces (PRESSURE) trial: cost effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Cynthia Iglesias; Jane Nixon; Gillian Cranny; E Andrea Nelson; Kim Hawkins; Angela Phillips; David Torgerson; Su Mason; Nicky Cullum
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-06-01

4.  Cost-effectiveness of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Cervical Clearance of Obtunded Blunt Trauma After a Normal Computed Tomographic Finding.

Authors:  Xiao Wu; Ajay Malhotra; Bertie Geng; Vivek B Kalra; Khalid Abbed; Howard P Forman; Pina Sanelli
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 14.766

5.  Cost-effectiveness of a pressure ulcer quality collaborative.

Authors:  Peter Makai; Marc Koopmanschap; Roland Bal; Anna P Nieboer
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2010-06-01

6.  An economic appraisal of the Australian Medical Sheepskin for the prevention of sacral pressure ulcers from a nursing home perspective.

Authors:  Patriek Mistiaen; Andre Ament; Anneke L Francke; Wilco Achterberg; Ruud Halfens; Janneke Huizinga; Henri Post
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 2.655

Review 7.  Economic Evaluations of Strategies to Prevent Hospital-Acquired Pressure Injuries.

Authors:  Wrechelle Ocampo; Amanda Cheung; Barry Baylis; Nancy Clayden; John M Conly; William A Ghali; Chester H Ho; Jaime Kaufman; Henry T Stelfox; David B Hogan
Journal:  Adv Skin Wound Care       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.347

8.  Health status utilities and the impact of pressure ulcers in long-term care residents in Ontario.

Authors:  Hla-Hla Thein; Tara Gomes; Murray D Krahn; Walter P Wodchis
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-12-22       Impact factor: 4.147

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.