Literature DB >> 20875048

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

Sarah J Whitehead1, Véronique L Forest-Bendien, Jean-Louis Richard, Serge Halimi, Georges Ha Van, Paul Trueman.   

Abstract

The objective of the study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of Vacuum Assisted Closure® (V.A.C.®) Therapy compared with advanced wound care (AWC) for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) in France. A cost-effectiveness model intended to reflect the management of DFUs was updated for the French setting. The Markov model follows the progression of 1000 hypothetical patients over a 1-year period. The model was populated with French-specific data, obtained from published sources and clinical experts. The analysis evaluated costs and health outcomes, in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), wounds healed and amputations, from the perspective of the payer. The patients treated with V.A.C.® Therapy experienced more QALYs (0.787 versus 0.784) and improved healing rates (50.2% versus 48.5%) at a lower total cost of care (€24,881 versus €28,855 per patient per year) when compared with AWC. Sensitivity analyses conducted around key model parameters indicated that the results were affected by hospital resource use and costs. DFU treatment using V.A.C.® Therapy in France was associated with lower costs, additional QALYs, more healed ulcers and fewer amputations than treatment with AWC. V.A.C.® Therapy was therefore found to be the dominant treatment option.
© 2010 The Authors. © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and Medicalhelplines.com Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20875048      PMCID: PMC7950900          DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2010.00739.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Wound J        ISSN: 1742-4801            Impact factor:   3.315


  26 in total

1.  The economic value of negative pressure wound therapy.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Niezgoda
Journal:  Ostomy Wound Manage       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 2.629

2.  Negative pressure wound therapy after partial diabetic foot amputation: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  David G Armstrong; Lawrence A Lavery
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005-11-12       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Costs of deep foot infections in patients with diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  G R Tennvall; J Apelqvist; M Eneroth
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 4.981

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

Authors:  S Flack; J Apelqvist; M Keith; P Trueman; D Williams
Journal:  J Wound Care       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 2.072

5.  Long-term costs for foot ulcers in diabetic patients in a multidisciplinary setting.

Authors:  J Apelqvist; G Ragnarson-Tennvall; J Larsson; U Persson
Journal:  Foot Ankle Int       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 2.827

6.  Resource utilization and economic costs of care based on a randomized trial of vacuum-assisted closure therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot wounds.

Authors:  Jan Apelqvist; David G Armstrong; Lawrence A Lavery; Andrew J M Boulton
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2008-03-26       Impact factor: 2.565

7.  Comparison of negative pressure wound therapy using vacuum-assisted closure with advanced moist wound therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Peter A Blume; Jodi Walters; Wyatt Payne; Jose Ayala; John Lantis
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2007-12-27       Impact factor: 19.112

8.  Diabetic foot disorders. A clinical practice guideline (2006 revision).

Authors:  Robert G Frykberg; Thomas Zgonis; David G Armstrong; Vickie R Driver; John M Giurini; Steven R Kravitz; Adam S Landsman; Lawrence A Lavery; J Christopher Moore; John M Schuberth; Dane K Wukich; Charles Andersen; John V Vanore
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Surg       Date:  2006 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.286

9.  A comparison of diabetic foot ulcer outcomes using negative pressure wound therapy versus historical standard of care.

Authors:  Lawrence A Lavery; Andrew J Boulton; Jeffrey A Niezgoda; Peter Sheehan
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.315

10.  Cost-effectiveness of negative pressure wound therapy for postsurgical patients in long-term acute care.

Authors:  Jean M de Leon; Sunni Barnes; Melody Nagel; Michelle Fudge; Adora Lucius; Betty Garcia
Journal:  Adv Skin Wound Care       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 2.347

View more
  6 in total

1.  The increased killing of biofilms in vitro by combining topical silver dressings with topical negative pressure in chronic wounds.

Authors:  Pedro Miguel Ds Valente; Anand Deva; Quan Ngo; Karen Vickery
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2014-04-08       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.  A Retrospective Comparison of the Performance of Two Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Systems in the Management of Wounds of Mixed Etiology.

Authors:  Theresa Hurd; Alan Rossington; Paul Trueman; Jennifer Smith
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2017-01-01       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 4.  Evaluation of negative-pressure wound therapy for patients with diabetic foot ulcers: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Si Liu; Chao-Zhu He; Yan-Ting Cai; Qiu-Ping Xing; Ying-Zhen Guo; Zhi-Long Chen; Ji-Liang Su; Li-Ping Yang
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 2.423

5.  Cost-effectiveness of TLC-NOSF dressings versus neutral dressings for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers in France.

Authors:  Franck Maunoury; Anaïs Oury; Sophie Fortin; Laetitia Thomassin; Serge Bohbot
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  NPWT resource use compared with standard moist wound care in diabetic foot wounds: DiaFu randomized clinical trial results.

Authors:  Dörthe Seidel; Rolf Lefering
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 3.050

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.