Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Wound Care ; 28(Sup9): S14-S26, 2019 Sep 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31509489

RESUMEN

AIM: Skin substitutes are frequently used to treat chronic diabetic foot ulcers (DFU), and many different options are available. While the clinical efficacy of many products has been evaluated, a comprehensive cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the most popular skin substitutes and using the most recent cost data has been lacking. METHODS: This study compared eight skin substitutes using published efficacy rates combined with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) 2018 cost data. The study criteria resulted in the inclusion of seven studies that described efficacy rates for treatment of DFUs using the skin substitutes. RESULTS: The results revealed wide discrepancies between these skin substitutes for the costs of treatments and healing rates in hospital outpatient departments and physician office settings. Healing rates for 12 and 16 weeks ranged from 28% to 68%, while the average cost for treating one DFU varied from $2001 to $14,507 and $1207 to $8791 in the hospital outpatient department and physician's office setting, respectively. The estimated patient share of costs for treating a single DFU ranged from $400 to $2901 and $241 to $1758 in the hospital outpatient department and physician's office setting, respectively. Most importantly, the estimated number of wounds healed out of 100 DFUs per $1000 expenditure with each patient ranged from 3.9-26.5 DFUs in the hospital outpatient department, and 4.3-36.4 DFUs in the physicians' office setting. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that the costs of a skin substitute itself did not necessarily correlate with its healing efficacy. These results provide a comprehensive cost-effectiveness analysis to enable integrated health-care systems, health professionals and reimbursement payers to make informed value decisions when treating DFUs.


Asunto(s)
Atención Ambulatoria/economía , Pie Diabético/terapia , Gastos en Salud , Piel Artificial/economía , Cicatrización de Heridas , Instituciones de Atención Ambulatoria/economía , Apósitos Biológicos/economía , Sulfatos de Condroitina/economía , Colágeno/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Pie Diabético/economía , Humanos , Servicio Ambulatorio en Hospital/economía , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida
2.
Dermatology ; 191(3): 240-1, 1995.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-8534943

RESUMEN

Saving the physicians time is very desirable in rendering first-rate dermatological service at lower cost. The aim is to reduce surgical instrumentation during skin biopsy procedures and follow-up visits. A combined instrument is used to obtain skin biopsies from 100 patients, and gelatin sponge plugs are used in hemostasis and to assist healing of the biopsy wound site. Skin biopsy samples are obtained simply and with ease, and, as the tissue sample is handled minimally, it appears to be more intact and less distorted in comparison to the usual procedure. Skin biopsy samples can be obtained with the combined instrument in a more cost-effective manner with savings of the physician's time and less instrumentation.


Asunto(s)
Biopsia/economía , Biopsia/instrumentación , Piel/patología , Anestesia Local/instrumentación , Biopsia/métodos , Colágeno/administración & dosificación , Colágeno/economía , Ahorro de Costo , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Dermatología/economía , Dermatología/instrumentación , Diseño de Equipo , Estudios de Seguimiento , Esponja de Gelatina Absorbible/administración & dosificación , Esponja de Gelatina Absorbible/economía , Hemostasis Quirúrgica/economía , Hemostasis Quirúrgica/instrumentación , Humanos , Agujas , Jeringas , Factores de Tiempo , Cicatrización de Heridas
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA