Literature DB >> 18389832

An economic evaluation of VAC therapy compared with wound dressings in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers.

S Flack1, J Apelqvist, M Keith, P Trueman, D Williams.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness ofVacuum Assisted Closure (VAC) therapy (KCI Medical), based on a comparison with both traditional and advanced wound dressings, for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers in the US.
METHOD: A Markov model was designed to estimate the cost per amputation avoided and the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of VAC therapy, compared with both traditional and advanced dressings. Over a one-year period the Markov model simulated 1000 patients using transition probabilities obtained from the literature. The health states used in the model were: uninfected ulcer; infected ulcer; infected ulcer post-amputation; healed; healed post-amputation; amputation; and death. Patients initially treated with VAC switched to the advanced dressing after three months of treatment if their wound remained unhealed. Patients treated with traditional or advanced dressings were assumed to continue with their treatment for the full 12 months if they remained unhealed.
RESULTS: The model results demonstrate improved healing rates (61% versus 59%), more QALYs (0.54 versus 0.53) and an overall lower cost of care ($52,830 versus $61,757 per person) for patients treated with VAC therapy compared with advanced dressings. Vacuum Assisted Closure was also shown to be a dominant intervention when compared with traditional dressings.
CONCLUSION: The model results indicate thatVAC therapy is less costly and more effective than both traditional and advanced dressings. The results are robust to changes in key parameters, including the transition probabilities, the cost ofVAC therapy and the utility weights applied to health states.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18389832     DOI: 10.12968/jowc.2008.17.2.28181

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Wound Care        ISSN: 0969-0700            Impact factor:   2.072


  18 in total

1.  Economic evaluation of Vacuum Assisted Closure® Therapy for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers in France.

Authors:  Sarah J Whitehead; Véronique L Forest-Bendien; Jean-Louis Richard; Serge Halimi; Georges Ha Van; Paul Trueman
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 3.315

2.  A cost-effectiveness analysis of optimal care for diabetic foot ulcers in Australia.

Authors:  Qinglu Cheng; Peter A Lazzarini; Michelle Gibb; Patrick H Derhy; Ewan M Kinnear; Edward Burn; Nicholas Graves; Rosana E Norman
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2016-08-04       Impact factor: 3.315

3.  Negative pressure wound therapy with instillation, a cost-effective treatment for abdominal mesh exposure.

Authors:  E Deleyto; A García-Ruano; J R González-López
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2017-10-30       Impact factor: 4.739

4.  Retrospective evaluation of clinical outcomes in subjects with split-thickness skin graft: comparing V.A.C.® therapy and conventional therapy in foot and ankle reconstructive surgeries.

Authors:  Peter A Blume; Jonathan J Key; Pratapji Thakor; Sejal Thakor; Bauer Sumpio
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2010-09-06       Impact factor: 3.315

5.  The SNaP Wound Care System: a case series using a novel ultraportable negative pressure wound therapy device for the treatment of diabetic lower extremity wounds.

Authors:  Bruce Lerman; Leslie Oldenbrook; Justin Ryu; Kenton D Fong; Peter J Schubart
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2010-07-01

Review 6.  Pain and trauma in negative pressure wound therapy: a review.

Authors:  Dominic Upton; Abbye Andrews
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2013-03-12       Impact factor: 3.315

7.  Results of vacuum assisted wound closure application.

Authors:  Tolga Atay; Halil Burc; Yakup Barbaros Baykal; Vecihi Kirdemir
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2012-04-19       Impact factor: 0.656

8.  Diabetic foot ulcer management in clinical practice in the UK: costs and outcomes.

Authors:  Julian F Guest; Graham W Fuller; Peter Vowden
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2017-12-15       Impact factor: 3.315

9.  Impact of vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) therapy on clinical outcomes of patients with sternal wound infections: a meta-analysis of non-randomized studies.

Authors:  Matthew E Falagas; Giannoula S Tansarli; Anastasios Kapaskelis; Konstantinos Z Vardakas
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-05-31       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Vacuum-assisted closure therapy in patients with large postoperative wounds complicated by multiple fistulas.

Authors:  Tomasz Banasiewicz; Maciej Borejsza-Wysocki; Wiktor Meissner; Stanisław Malinger; Jacek Szmeja; Tomasz Kościński; Andrzej Ratajczak; Michał Drews
Journal:  Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne       Date:  2011-09-30       Impact factor: 1.195

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.