The use of antimicrobial dressings for the management of diabetic foot ulcers: A survey of podiatrists in Aotearoa New Zealand.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are commonly contaminated with pathogenic organisms and precede most diabetes-related amputations. Antimicrobial dressings are used in the treatment of DFUs; however, recent guidelines do not support their use. There are no data describing the experience of antimicrobial dressing use among podiatrists in Aotearoa New Zealand (AoNZ). This study aimed to (i) determine which antimicrobial dressings podiatrists in AoNZ use for the management of diabetic foot ulcers; and (ii) determine what factors influence AoNZ podiatrists' use of antimicrobial dressing when managing DFUs. METHODS: An anonymous cross-sectional web-based survey was undertaken. Participants were AoNZ registered podiatrists who managed DFUs in their practice. The survey included questions relating to personal and professional demographic characteristics and DFU management and dressing practices. Descriptive statistics were computed to address the research aims. RESULTS: Responses from 43 AoNZ podiatrists were included. Participants reported both cadexomer iodine and silver dressings were the most common antimicrobial dressings used, with honey dressings being the least frequently used. The most influential factors in choosing antimicrobial dressings when managing DFUs were the presence of current infection, ulcer exudate and ability to prevent future infection. The least influential factors in choosing antimicrobial dressings when managing DFUs were patient preferences, cost of dressings and comfort of dressing/pain on removal. CONCLUSIONS: AoNZ podiatrists managing DFUs primarily use antimicrobial dressings containing cadexomer iodine or silver as active ingredients, while lower-cost options, such as honey and povidone iodine are less often used. Current recommendations highlight the lack of evidence to support positive outcomes from any particular antimicrobial dressing over another and advocate that exudate control, comfort and cost be prioritised in decision-making. As cost has been an increasing burden to our healthcare funding, clinicians and organisations may consider this before purchasing and stocking expensive dressings.

[Economic and clinical aspects of postoperative bandages selection: in search of the best solution]. / Ekonomicheskie i klinicheskie aspekty vybora posleoperatsionnykh povyazok: v poiskakh optimal'nogo resheniya.

OBJECTIVE: Investigation of the clinical and economic advisability of using self-adhesive wound bandages of plaster type (on the example of Cosmopor E steril) compared to gauze bandages in the conditions of medical organization. METHODS: Study design - a retrospective analysis of literature data. Methods of pharmacoeconomic analysis - cost minimization analysis, «impact on budget¼ analysis. The Unified Information System in Procurement was the information source of the self-adhesive bandages cost. The charges of gauze bandages production were calculated on the basis of data provided by structural subdivisions of SamSMU Clinics. RESULTS: It was determined that the use of self-adhesive bandages of plaster type is economically feasible as a result of the analysis of cost minimization and impact on the budget. Saving during 1 year can be from 259 466 to 532 603 rubles (in total for three departments - 1.1 million rubles). Sensitivity analysis showed the stability of the obtained results to the variation of entry conditions (costs for gauze bandages and bandages of plaster type) in a wide range of values. CONCLUSION: The data obtained from the study showed that the use of bandages of plaster type for different types of surgical treatment is more justified in terms of cost saving.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of soft bandage and immediate discharge versus rigid immobilization in children with distal radius torus fractures.

Aims: The aim of this trial was to assess the cost-effectiveness of a soft bandage and immediate discharge, compared with rigid immobilization, in children aged four to 15 years with a torus fracture of the distal radius. Methods: A within-trial economic evaluation was conducted from the UK NHS and personal social services (PSS) perspective, as well as a broader societal point of view. Health resources and quality of life (the youth version of the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D-Y)) data were collected, as part of the Forearm Recovery in Children Evaluation (FORCE) multicentre randomized controlled trial over a six-week period, using trial case report forms and patient-completed questionnaires. Costs and health gains (quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) were estimated for the two trial treatment groups. Regression was used to estimate the probability of the new treatment being cost-effective at a range of 'willingness-to-pay' thresholds, which reflect a range of costs per QALY at which governments are typically prepared to reimburse for treatment. Results: The offer of a soft bandage significantly reduced cost per patient (saving £12.55 (95% confidence interval (CI) -£5.30 to £19.80)) while QALYs were similar (QALY difference between groups: 0.0013 (95% CI -0.0004 to 0.003)). The high probability (95%) that offering a bandage is a cost-effective option was consistent when examining the data in a range of sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: In addition to the known clinical equivalence, this study found that the offer of a bandage reduced cost compared with rigid immobilization among children with a torus fracture of the distal radius. While the cost saving was small for each patient, the high frequency of these injuries indicates a significant saving across the healthcare system.

Novel Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Securement for Children and Catheter Failure Reduction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) facilitate essential treatment. Failure of these essential devices is frequent and new securement strategies may reduce failure and improve patient outcomes. Objective: To evaluate clinical effectiveness of novel PIVC securement technologies for children to reduce catheter failure. Design, Setting, and Participants: A 3-arm, parallel group, superiority randomized clinical trial was conducted at 2 regional Australian hospitals from February 5, 2020, to January 14, 2022. Children aged 6 months to 8 years who were anticipated to require admission with a PIVC for at least 24 hours of in hospital treatment were eligible. Data were analyzed from May 25, 2022, to February 20, 2024. Interventions: Participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to standard care, bordered polyurethane (Tegaderm [3M]), integrated securement dressing (SorbaView SHIELD [Medline]), and integrated securement dressing with tissue adhesive (Secureport IV). One catheter was studied per patient. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was PIVC failure, defined as premature cessation of PIVC function for any reason prior to completion of planned treatment. Secondary outcomes were PIVC complications (any time dislodgement, occlusion, infiltration, partial dislodgement, extravasation, device leaking, phlebitis, pain), PIVC longevity, intervention acceptability (clinicians, participants, caregivers; 0-10 scale), and pain on removal (participants and caregivers; 0-10 scale relevant to age), adverse events, and health care costs. Results: A total of 383 patients (51% female; median age 36 [25th-75th percentiles, 22-72] months) were randomized 134 to standard care, 118 to integrated securement dressing, and 131 to integrated securement dressing with tissue adhesive. PIVC failure was lowest in integrated securement dressing with tissue adhesive (15 [12%]; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.26-0.84) compared with integrated securement dressing (24 [21%]; aHR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.47-1.28) and standard care (43 [34%]). Direct costs were significantly lower for integrated securement dressing with tissue adhesive (median, Australian dollars [A$], 312 [A$1 is equal to $0.65 US dollars]; IQR, A$302-A$380) and integrated securement dressing (median, A$303; IQR, A$294-A$465) compared with standard care (median, A$341; IQR, A$297-A$592; P ≤ .002) when considering the economic burden related to failure of devices. PIVC longevity and intervention acceptability were similar across all groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, PIVCs secured with integrated securement dressings and tissue adhesive, in comparison with standard care, bordered polyurethane dressings, were associated with significantly reduced PIVC failure, for children admitted to hospital via the emergency department. Further research should focus on implementation in inpatient units where prolonged dwell and reliable intravenous access is most needed. Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Identifier: ACTRN12619001026112.

Improved Short-Term Prognosis of Pediatric Partial-Thickness Burns: Emergency Conservative Debridement Under Topical Anesthesia.

OBJECTIVES: Early wound management for pediatric patients with partial-thickness burns in the emergency department remains debatable. This study aims to evaluate the value of emergency conservative debridement under topical anesthesia in improving short-term prognosis of pediatric partial-thickness burns. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study enrolled children with partial-thickness thermal burns presenting to the emergency department within 6 hours postburn. All the enrolled patients were divided into 2 groups: the debridement group and the dressing group. The associations between emergency conservative debridement and time to reepithelialization was analyzed by using Kaplan-Meier curves with log rank test and multivariate Cox regression analysis. Moreover, the associations between emergency conservative debridement and in-hospital cost and length of stay were also evaluated. RESULTS: All baseline characteristics between groups were comparable (all P > 0.05). Emergency conservative debridement under topical anesthesia significantly decreased the median value of time to reepithelialization (13 vs 14 days, P = 0.02). Cox regression analysis showed that emergency conservative debridement significantly improved wound reepithelialization after adjusting for burn size (odds ratio, 4.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.64-10.11; P < 0.01). The mean length of stay of patients receiving conservative wound debridement was lower than that of patients in the wound dressing group (14.3 ± 7.3 vs 18.8 ± 10.4 days, P < 0.01), but not in terms of mean in-hospital cost per 1% total body surface area (2.8 ± 1.9 vs 3.0 ± 2.1 × 103 RMB per 1% total body surface area, P = 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: Emergency conservative debridement of pediatric partial-thickness burns under topical anesthesia significantly improves the wound healing outcomes without increasing health care burden.

Single-use negative pressure wound therapy reduces costs in closed surgical incisions: UK and US economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: Single-use negative pressure wound therapy (sNPWT) following closed surgical incisions has a demonstrable effect in reducing surgical site complications (SSC). However, there is little health economic evidence to support its widespread use. We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sNPWT compared with standard care in reducing SSCs following closed surgical incisions. METHOD: A decision analytic model was developed to explore the total costs and health outcomes associated with the use of the interventions in patients following vascular, colorectal, cardiothoracic, orthopaedic, C-section and breast surgery from the UK National Health Service (NHS) and US payer perspective over a 12-week time horizon. We modelled complications avoided (surgical site infection (SSI) and dehiscence) using data from a recently published meta-analysis. Cost data were sourced from published literature, NHS reference costs and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. We conducted subgroup analysis of patients with diabetes, an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥3 and body mass index (BMI) ≥30kg/m2. A sensitivity analysis was also conducted. RESULTS: sNPWT resulted in better clinical outcomes and overall savings of £105 per patient from the UK perspective and $637 per patient from the US perspective. There were more savings when higher-risk patients with diabetes, or a BMI ≥30kg/m2 or an ASA≥3 were considered. We conducted both one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis, and the results suggested that this conclusion is robust. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the use of sNPWT following closed surgical incisions saves cost when compared with standard care because of reduced incidence of SSC. Patients at higher risk should be targeted first as they benefit more from sNPWT. This analysis is underpinned by strong and robust clinical evidence from both randomised and observational studies.

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

This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of Technology Lipido-Colloid with Nano Oligo Saccharide Factor (TLC-NOSF) wound dressings versus neutral dressings in the management of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) from a French collective perspective. We used a Markov microsimulation cohort model to simulate the DFU monthly progression over the lifetime horizon. Our study employed a mixed method design with model inputs including data from interventional and observational studies, French databases and expert opinion. The demographic characteristics of the simulated population and clinical efficacy were based on the EXPLORER double-blind randomized controlled trial. Health-related quality of life, costs, and resource use inputs were taken from the literature relevant to the French context. The main outcomes included life-years without DFU (LYsw/DFU), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), amputations, and lifetime costs. To assess the robustness of the results, sensitivity and subgroup analyses based on the wound duration at treatment initiation were performed. Treatment with the TLC-NOSF dressing led to total cost savings per patient of EUR 35,489, associated with gains of 0.50 LYw/DFU and 0.16 QALY. TLC-NOSF dressings were established as the dominant strategy in the base case and all sensitivity analyses. Furthermore, the model revealed that, for every 100 patients treated with TLC-NOSF dressings, two amputations could be avoided. According to the subgroup analysis results, the sooner the TLC-NOSF treatment was initiated, the better were the outcomes, with the highest benefits for ulcers with a duration of two months or less (+0.65 LYw/DFU, +0.23 QALY, and cost savings of EUR 55,710). The results from the French perspective are consistent with the ones from the German and British perspectives. TLC-NOSF dressings are cost-saving compared to neutral dressings, leading to an increase in patients' health benefits and a decrease in the associated treatment costs. These results can thus be used to guide healthcare decisionmakers. The potential savings could represent EUR 3,345 per treated patient per year and even reach EUR 4,771 when TLC-NOSF dressings are used as first line treatment. The EXPLORER trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01717183.

Implementing a Locally Made Low-Cost Intervention for Wound and Lymphedema Care in Western Kenya.

In Western Kenya, the burden of chronic wounds and lymphedema has a significant impact on functionality and quality of life. Major barriers to provision of care include availability, affordability, and accessibility of bandages. At the Academic Model Providing Access to Healthcare, dermatologists and pharmacists collaborated to develop a 2-component compression bandage modeled after the Unna boot, using locally available materials, that is distributed through a revolving fund pharmacy network. In partnership with nursing, use of these bandages at a national referral hospital and a few county facilities has increased, but increasing utilization to an expanded catchment area is needed.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of negative pressure wound therapy dressings after open inguinal vascular surgery - The randomised INVIPS-Trial.

AIM: While the scientific evidence in favour of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) dressings on sutured incisions in the prevention of surgical site infections (SSIs) has increased, the cost-effectiveness after vascular surgery has not been evaluated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of NPWT compared to standard dressings for the prevention of SSIs after open inguinal vascular surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient data were retrieved from the randomised INVIPS-trial's open arm, which included patients randomised to either NPWT or standard dressings. The patients were surveyed for SSIs for 90 days postoperatively. The patients' individual cost data were included and analysed from a healthcare perspective. The patients' quality of life was measured using the Vascuqol-6 questionnaire pre- and 30 days postoperatively. Cost-effectiveness of NPWT was determined by decreased or equal total costs and a significant reduction in SSI incidence. RESULTS: The mean vascular procedure-related costs at 90 days were €16,621 for patients treated with NPWT (n = 59) and €16,285 for patients treated with standard dressings (n = 60), p = 0.85. The SSI incidence in patients treated with NPWT was 11.9% (n = 7/59) compared to 30.0% (n = 18/60) with standard dressings, p = 0.015. This corresponds to an increased mean cost of €1,853 per SSI avoided. The cost-effectiveness plane of incremental vascular procedure-related costs and difference in Vascuqol-6 score showed that 42% of estimates were in the quadrant where NPWT was dominant. CONCLUSION: NPWT is considered cost-effective over standard dressings in patients undergoing open inguinal vascular surgery due to reduced SSI incidence at no higher costs.

Clinical and Health-Care Cost Analysis of Negative Pressure Dressing in Primary and RevisionTotal Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been used because of its perceived advantages in reducing surgical site infections, wound complications, and the need for further surgery. The purpose of this study was to assess the infection rates, wound complications, length of stay, and financial burden associated with NPWT use in primary and revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: We performed a PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) systematic review of the existing literature on using NPWT in primary and revision TKA. PubMed, Embase, Science Direct, and the Cochrane Library were utilized. The risk of bias was evaluated using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions) tool, and the quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria. RESULTS: Twelve articles that evaluated 1,403 primary TKAs and 279 revision TKAs were reviewed. NPWT significantly reduced complication rates in revision TKA. However, there was no significant difference in infection rates between NPWT and regular dressings in primary or revision TKA. NPWT use in primary TKA significantly increased the risk of blistering, although no increase in reoperations was noted. The analysis showed a possible reduction in length of stay associated with NPWT use for both primary and revision TKA, with overall health-care cost savings. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a meta-analysis of the existing literature, we do not recommend the routine use of NPWT. However, in high-risk revision TKA and selected primary TKA cases, NPWT reduced wound complications and may have health-care cost savings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Negative-pressure wound therapy compared with standard dressings following surgical treatment of major trauma to the lower limb: the WHiST RCT.

BACKGROUND: Major trauma is the leading cause of death in people aged < 45 years. Patients with major trauma usually have lower-limb fractures. Surgery to fix the fractures is complicated and the risk of infection may be as high as 27%. The type of dressing applied after surgery could potentially reduce the risk of infection. OBJECTIVES: To assess the deep surgical site infection rate, disability, quality of life, patient assessment of the surgical scar and resource use in patients with surgical incisions associated with fractures following major trauma to the lower limbs treated with incisional negative-pressure wound therapy versus standard dressings. DESIGN: A pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Twenty-four specialist trauma hospitals representing the UK Major Trauma Network. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1548 adult patients were randomised from September 2016 to April 2018. Exclusion criteria included presentation > 72 hours after injury and inability to complete questionnaires. INTERVENTIONS: Incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (n = 785), in which a non-adherent absorbent dressing covered with a semipermeable membrane is connected to a pump to create a partial vacuum over the wound, versus standard dressings not involving negative pressure (n = 763). Trial participants and the treating surgeon could not be blinded to treatment allocation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Deep surgical site infection at 30 days was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes were deep infection at 90 days, the results of the Disability Rating Index, health-related quality of life, the results of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale and resource use collected at 3 and 6 months post surgery. RESULTS: A total of 98% of participants provided primary outcome data. There was no evidence of a difference in the rate of deep surgical site infection at 30 days. The infection rate was 6.7% (50/749) in the standard dressing group and 5.8% (45/770) in the incisional negative-pressure wound therapy group (intention-to-treat odds ratio 0.87; 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 1.33; p = 0.52). There was no difference in the deep surgical site infection rate at 90 days: 13.2% in the standard dressing group and 11.4% in the incisional negative-pressure wound therapy group (odds ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.19; p = 0.32). There was no difference between the two groups in disability, quality of life or scar appearance at 3 or 6 months. Incisional negative-pressure wound therapy did not reduce the cost of treatment and was associated with a low probability of cost-effectiveness. LIMITATIONS: Owing to the emergency nature of the surgery, we anticipated that some patients who were randomised would subsequently be unable or unwilling to participate. However, the majority of the patients (85%) agreed to participate. Therefore, participants were representative of the population with lower-limb fractures associated with major trauma. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study do not support the use of negative-pressure wound therapy in patients having surgery for major trauma to the lower limbs. FUTURE WORK: Our work suggests that the use of incisional negative-pressure wound therapy dressings in other at-risk surgical wounds requires further investigation. Future research may also investigate different approaches to reduce postoperative infections, for example the use of topical antibiotic preparations in surgical wounds and the role of orthopaedic implants with antimicrobial coatings when fixing the associated fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12702354 and UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio ID20416. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library for further project information.

WHAT DID THE TRIAL FIND?: We found no evidence of a difference in the rate of surgical site infection between those patients randomised to negative-pressure wound therapy and those patients randomised to standard wound dressings. There was no difference in the rate of other wound healing complications or in the patients' self-report of disability, health-related quality of life or scar healing. Negative-pressure wound therapy is very unlikely to be cost-effective for the NHS. In conclusion, and contrary to previous reports, the findings of this study do not support the use of negative-pressure wound therapy in patients having surgery for major trauma to their legs.

Major trauma is the leading cause of death worldwide in people aged < 45 years and a significant cause of short- and long-term health problems. In 85% of major trauma patients, the injury involves broken bones. Surgery to fix broken bones in the lower limbs is complicated and has risks, one of the main ones being wound infection. In these patients, rates of wound infection have been reported to be as high as 27%. One factor that may affect the risk of infection is the type of dressing applied after surgery. In this trial, we compared standard wound dressings with a new treatment called incisional negative-pressure wound therapy. Negative-pressure wound therapy is a special type of dressing whereby gentle suction is applied to the surface of the wound. A total of 1548 patients from 24 specialist trauma hospitals in the UK agreed to take part and were assigned at random to receive either a standard wound dressing or negative-pressure wound therapy after their surgery. We reviewed the recovery of the patients for 6 months. We recorded how many had an infection in the surgical wound and asked the patients to rate the extent of their disability, their quality of life and the scar healing. We also collected information about the cost of treatment.

Cost-utility analysis of standard dressing compared with incisional negative-pressure wound therapy among patients with closed surgical wounds following major trauma to the lower limb.

AIMS: To compare the cost-utility of standard dressing with incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) in adults with closed surgical wounds associated with major trauma to the lower limbs. METHODS: A within-trial economic evaluation was conducted from the UK NHS and personal social services (PSS) perspective based on data collected from the Wound Healing in Surgery for Trauma (WHiST) multicentre randomized clinical trial. Health resource utilization was collected over a six-month post-randomization period using trial case report forms and participant-completed questionnaires. Cost-utility was reported in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to test the robustness of cost-effectiveness estimates while uncertainty was handled using confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. RESULTS: The incremental cost of standard dressing versus iNPWT over six months was £2,037 (95% confidence interval (CI) £349 to £3,724). There was an insignificant increment in QALYs gained in the iNPWT group (0.005, 95% CI -0.018 to 0.028). The probability of iNPWT being cost-effective at £20,000 per QALY was 1.9%. The results remained robust in the sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: The within-trial economic evaluation suggests that iNPWT is unlikely to be a cost-effective alternative to standard dressing in adults with closed surgical wounds to their lower limbs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(8):1072-1081.

Comparison of platelet-rich plasma gel in the care of the pressure ulcers with the dressing with serum physiology in terms of healing process and dressing costs.

This research was carried out with the aim of comparing the effects of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) gel and gas dressing with serum physiologic applied to stage II pressure ulcer in coccyx of patients for 2 months on healing process and dressing costs. This prospective randomised controlled experimental study was conducted with 60 patients hospitalised in the palliative care unit after surgery. The experimental group (n = 30) was dressed with platelet-rich plasma gel. The control group (n = 30) was treated with serum physiologic dressing. At the end of the 20th observation of the patients in the experimental group, it was found that the mean scores of area, exudate, and tissue type in pressure sores decreased statistically (P < .001). In the control group, no significant difference was found between the mean PUSH score at the end of the 20th observation (P > .05). The study showed that PRP gel had a positive effect on healing of stage II pressure ulcers with platelet-rich plasma gel dressings. In addition, when evaluated in the long term, it was concluded that platelet-rich plasma gel is easily accessible and less costly than serum physiological dressing.

A multilayer polyurethane foam dressing for pressure ulcer prevention in older hip fracture patients: an economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: Hospital-acquired pressure ulcers (PU) have a substantial negative impact on patients and continue to impose a cost burden on hospital providers. Since the incidence of fragility fracture is growing, driven by the increase in the older population, it is expected that the overall incidence of associated complications will also increase accordingly. The aim of this economic evaluation was to determine whether the use of a multilayer, silicone-adhesive polyurethane foam dressing (ALLEVYN LIFE, Smith & Nephew, UK) alongside standard prevention (SP) for the prevention of PUs in older patients with hip fractures is a cost-effective strategy, compared with SP alone. METHOD: A decision-analytic model was constructed to determine the incremental cost and effectiveness of the foam dressing strategy from the perspectives of the Italian and US hospital systems. We also performed one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The foam dressing intervention was found to be cost saving and more effective than SP in both Italy and the US. Switching to foam dressing and standard prevention would result in an expected cost saving of €733 per patient in Italy and $840 per patient in the US, reducing the per-patient cost of treating PUs by 37-69% and 36-68%, respectively. The one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrate that the strategy remains dominant over a range of values of the input variables. CONCLUSION: The foam dressing intervention is likely to be a cost-effective strategy compared with standard prevention alone.

Bluebelle pilot randomised controlled trial of three wound dressing strategies to reduce surgical site infection in primary surgical wounds.

OBJECTIVE: Surgical site infection (SSI) affects up to 25% of primary surgical wounds. Dressing strategies may influence SSI risk. The Bluebelle study assessed the feasibility of a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different dressing strategies to reduce SSI in primary surgical wounds. DESIGN: A pilot, factorial RCT. SETTING: Five UK hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Adults undergoing abdominal surgery with a primary surgical wound. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to 'simple dressing', 'glue-as-a-dressing' or 'no dressing', and to the time at which the treatment allocation was disclosed to the surgeon (disclosure time, before or after wound closure). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility outcomes focused on recruitment, adherence to randomised allocations, reference assessment of SSI and response rates to participant-completed and observer-completed questionnaires to assess SSI (proposed primary outcome for main trial), wound experience and symptoms, and quality of life (EQ-5D-5L). RESULTS: Between March and November 2016, 1115 patients were screened; 699 (73.4%) were eligible and approached, 415 (59.4%) consented and 394 (35.3%) were randomised (simple dressing=133, glue=129 and 'no dressing'=132). Non-adherence to dressing allocation was 2% (3/133), 6% (8/129) and 15% (20/132), respectively. Adherence to disclosure time was 99% and 86% before and after wound closure, respectively. The overall rate of SSI (reference assessment) was 18.1% (51/281). Response rates to the Wound Healing Questionnaire and other questionnaires ranged from >90% at 4 days to 68% at 4-8 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: A definitive RCT of dressing strategies including 'no dressing' is feasible. Further work is needed to optimise questionnaire response rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 49328913; Pre-results.

The effectiveness of negative-pressure wound therapy for wound healing after stoma reversal: a randomised control study (SR-PICO study).

BACKGROUND: Although the wound-healing period for purse-string closure (PSC) after stoma reversal is longer than that required for the primary closure method, the rate of wound infection is reduced. The application of negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) can reduce the healing period for many types of wounds. Herein, we describe a planned trial to test the hypothesis that NPWT can reduce the healing period for PSC after stoma reversal. METHODS/DESIGN: Patients undergoing stoma reversal will be recruited and allocated into intervention and control groups, with 1:1 randomisation. Patients in the control group will receive standard postsurgical wound care; patients in the intervention group will receive NPWT using the PICO™ system. The target sample size will be 38 patients, as this will provide 80% power at the 5% level of significance to detect a 7-day reduction in the wound-healing period in the intervention group compared to that in the control group. The primary endpoint will be the duration to wound healing, defined as the time to nearly complete epithelisation of the wound, without any discharge or surgical site infection (SSI). Secondary endpoints will be the SSI rate, length of postoperative hospital stay, number of wound dressings and visits to the hospital for wound dressing after discharge, total cost of wound dressings, and patient and observer scar assessment scale scores. DISCUSSION: The results of this planned randomised controlled study will clarify the role of NPWT in patients undergoing stoma reversal and strengthen the rationale for choosing a dressing technique. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS), KCT0004063. Registered on 6 June 2019.

Use of antimicrobial dressings in England and the association with published clinical guidance: interrupted time series analysis.

OBJECTIVES: In healthcare systems, practices and products of unproven value and cost-effectiveness can decrease value and increase waste. Using the management of complex wounds, this study investigates temporal trends in the use of antimicrobials dressings, places this in the context of available evidence and discusses the potential impacts on the UK National Health Service (NHS). DESIGN: Secondary descriptive and interrupted time series (ITS) analysis of NHS prescription data. SETTING: Prescribing Cost Analysis (PCA) details all NHS prescriptions dispensed in the community in England. INTERVENTIONS: An ITS design was used to compare annual changes in the expenditure and use of antimicrobial and non-antimicrobial dressings before and after the publication of the 'intervention' of key evidence-based Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) guidance in 2010. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Trends in use and expenditure of antimicrobial dressings in relation to published clinical guidance. RESULTS: There was a large increase in the prescribing of, and expenditure on, antimicrobial wound dressings between 1997 and 2016. In 1997, the total number of dressings prescribed was 5 792 700; increasing to 11 447 102 in 2009 with expenditure increasing from £1 960 386 to £32 841 263. During the year of the SIGN intervention (2010), there was a significant drop in the use of silver but there was no consistent ongoing reduction from 2011 to 2015. CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing data can be used to identify products of unproven benefit, which also impose a significant financial burden. This study quantifies the huge increase in the use of antimicrobial wound dressings over a 20-year period despite the lack of compelling evidence to support their routine use. There is some suggestion, however that the use and expenditure decreased after the publication of key guidance. Routine data can be used to as part of more systematic efforts to increase value and reduce waste in health systems.

Five-layer border dressings as part of a quality improvement bundle to prevent pressure injuries in US skilled nursing facilities and Australian nursing homes: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

The BORDER III trial found that five-layer silicone border dressings effectively prevented pressure injuries in long-term care, but the value of this approach is unknown. Our objective was to analyse the cost-effectiveness of preventing facility-acquired pressure injuries with a quality improvement bundle, including prophylactic five-layer dressings in US and Australian long-term care. Markov models analysed the cost utility for pressure injuries acquired during long-term care from US and Australian perspectives. Models calibrated outcomes for standard care compared with a dressing-inclusive bundle over 18 monthly cycles or until death based on BORDER III outcomes. Patients who developed a pressure injury simulated advancement through stages 1 to 4. Univariate and multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analyses tested modelling uncertainty. Costs in 2017 USD and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to calculate an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Dressing use yielded greater QALYs at slightly higher costs from perspectives. The US ICER was $36 652/QALY, while the Australian ICER was $15 898/QALY, both of which fell below a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis favoured dressings as cost-effective for most simulations. A quality improvement bundle, including prophylactic five-layer dressings, is a cost-effective approach for pressure injury prevention in all US and Australia long-term care residents.

Improving the Quality of Chronic Wound Care Using an Advanced Wound Management Program and Gentian Violet/Methylene Blue-Impregnated Antibacterial (GV/MB) Dressings: A Retrospective Study.

INTRODUCTION: Comprehensive wound management programs that employ a standardized integrated care bundle (ICB) and advanced wound dressings are generally recognized to decrease healing times and treatment costs. The purpose of this study was to compare wound healing rates and cost efficiencies as measured by nursing-care requirements for patients not on an ICB versus patients on an ICB and using a gentian violet/methylene blue-impregnated (GV/MB) antimicrobial advanced wound dressing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The comprehensive wound management programs enabled continuous, standardized measurement of each patient's wound episode from admission with a wound to healing and discharge. Data was recorded over 24 months from 2016 to 2018. The variables recorded for each patient included: wound healing time (number of weeks), wound acuity based on the Bates-Jensen Wound Assessment Tool (BWAT), a comorbidity index (using the Charlson Comorbidity Index), and the number of wound dressing changes. The wound dressing changes required a visit by a registered nurse and, therefore, served as an indicator of care delivery costs where the dressing change visit cost was $68 (CAD). RESULTS: A total of 6300 patients (25% of the total study population) were identified as using GV/MB dressings within the context of an ICB. The mean healing time for these patients was accelerated more than 50% versus patients not on an ICB. The average total cost of patient care was reduced by more than 75% from diagnosis to wound healing when patients were on an ICB with GV/MB dressings. These results compared well to patients on ICBs that had other types of advanced dressings. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates that a comprehensive wound management program based on integrated care bundles in conjunction with GV/MB dressings can be a highly-effective clinical option. The benefits showed significant reductions in healing times and treatment costs.