Custo-minimização de curativos para cateter venoso central: gaze estéril versus filme transparente / Cost-minimization of bandage for central venous catheter: sterile gauze versus transparent film / Minimización de costes del vendage para catéter venoso central: gasa estéril versus película transparente

Objetivo: comparar o custo entre coberturas com filme transparente versus gaze estéril e fita adesiva microporosa em curativos de acesso venoso central. Método: estudo estatístico, prospectivo, observacional, com abordagem quantitativa à luz da avaliação econômica de saúde. Foram avaliadas 109 coberturas com filme e 168 com gaze, durante 27 dias. Na análise utilizouse o Software Tree Age para se calcular a probabilidade de cada decisão. Resultado: a média de uso das coberturas por dia foi de 2,22 inserções cobertas com filme e 3,43 com gaze. Houve necessidade de troca extra em 38 (23%) das coberturas com gaze e em 16 (15%) das coberturas com filme transparente. Observou-se custo final médio para gaze (R$389,44) 3,7 vezes maior que o filme transparente (R$104,95) durante o período estudado. Conclusão: cobertura com filme transparente tem menor custo quando comparado com cobertura com gaze estéril.

Objective: to compare the cost of transparent film and sterile gauze fixed by microporous adhesive tape in central venous access dressings. Method: quantitative, prospective, observational, statistical study in the light of health economics. A total of 109 film and 168 gauze covers were evaluated for 27 days. Tree Age software was used to calculate the probability of each decision. Results: coverings used per day averaged 2.22 with transparent film-covered inserts and 3.43 with gauze. Additional changes were necessary in 38 (23%) coverings with gauze and 16 (15%) with transparent film. During the study period, the average final cost of gauze (R$ 389.44) was 3.7 times higher than transparent film (R$104.95). Conclusion: transparent film dressing is less expensive than sterile gauze covering.

Objetivo: comparar el costo de la película transparente y la gasa estéril fijada con cinta adhesiva microporosa en apósitos de acceso venoso central. Método: estudio cuantitativo, prospectivo, observacional, estadístico a la luz de la economía de la salud. Se evaluaron un total de 109 películas y 168 cubiertas de gasa durante 27 días. Se utilizó el software Tree Age para calcular la probabilidad de cada decisión. Resultados: los recubrimientos utilizados por día promediaron 2,22 con inserciones transparentes recubiertas con película y 3,43 con gasas. Fueron necesarios cambios adicionales en 38 (23%) revestimientos con gasa y 16 (15%) con película transparente. Durante el período de estudio, el costo final promedio de la gasa (R $ 389,44) fue 3,7 veces superior al de la película transparente (R $ 104,95). Conclusión: el apósito de película transparente es menos costoso que el recubrimiento de gasa estéril.

A Comparison of Dressing Techniques for Presurgical Closure of Myelomeningocele in the Neonate.

BACKGROUND: Myelomeningoceles are routinely closed surgically within 24 to 48 hours after birth; the defect and exposed placode must be protected from further damage from excoriation and contamination until surgery. PURPOSE: Two methods to keep the defect moist and clean are used at our large Midwestern children's hospital: the occlusive and the drip. There was no agreement between the neonatal and neurosurgical teams as to which technique was superior, hence the need for a formal evaluation. METHODS: A prospective, randomized trial was conducted to compare the ease of nursing care, cost of supplies, neonatal temperature, and moisture of the placode at the time of closure in neonates with a myelomeningocele. RESULTS: Nurses categorized the occlusive group as easy care (100%) compared with 60% for the drip group, although the difference was not statistically significant (P = .18). The mean temperatures of the 2 groups before surgery were identical (36.9°C) in both groups. The cost of the drip was 6 times higher than that of the occlusive technique. The placode was assessed as moist in all 13 cases (100%). CONCLUSION: The occlusive technique was easier to care for by all the nurses and was 6 times more cost effective. Both methods kept the placode moist and did not affect the temperature of the baby.

A Comparison of Three Dressing Methods for Pilonidal Sinus Surgery Wound Healing.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of different dressing methods on the wound healing process after pilonidal sinus surgery. METHODS: In this clinical trial, 60 patients undergoing pilonidal sinus surgery were randomly assigned to one of three groups. In the first group, hydrogel or alginate and hydrocolloid compounds were used as a standard occlusive dressing method. A modified dressing method was used for the second group, in which transparent hydrocolloid films were replaced by Vaseline gauze. The third group was treated using gauze swabs soaked in normal saline. The length and depth of the studied wounds were recorded once a week for a month. During dressing changes, patient pain was recorded using an 11-point numeric rating scale. The collected data were analyzed by descriptive and inferential statistical methods. RESULTS: There was a significant reduction in wound length after 2 weeks in all three groups (P < .05), and the pain experienced by the first and second groups was significantly lower than the third group. However, the modified method used for the second group was associated with a lower cost. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the beneficial results of using modern dressings for wound healing and reducing the severity of associated pain, providers may want to consider using modified wound dressings after pilonidal sinus surgery. Study authors recommend that providers receive training on how to use these products.

Cost comparison of pressure ulcer preventive dressings: hydrocolloid dressing versus transparent polyurethane film.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the costs of using a transparent polyurethane film (PF) and hydrocolloid dressing (HD) in the prevention of pressure ulcers (PUs). METHOD: This descriptive, observational, longitudinal, comparative study was conducted in the intensive care units, coronary care unit and medical clinic of a charity hospital in Brazil. Data were collected during a 30-day study period, consisting of physical examination, assessment of risk factors for PU development and application of the Braden scale, which were performed at inclusion in the study and once daily during hospitalisation. Either PF or HD was applied bilaterally in the sacral and trochanteric regions for prevention of PUs in patients at a moderate to high risk of PUs according to the Braden scale, and costs of using PU preventive dressings were estimated. RESULTS: The mean total costs per dressing change per patient when using the HD and PF to prevent PUs were 413.60 BRL and 74.04 BRL, respectively. There were significant between-group differences in mean costs for all variables, except for saline solution and nurse-technician services. CONCLUSION: Results showed that the mean cost per dressing change per patient was lower when using the transparent PF than when using the HD.

A cost and clinical effectiveness analysis among moist wound healing dressings versus traditional methods in home care patients with pressure ulcers.

The aim of the study was a cost and clinical effectiveness analysis between moist wound healing dressings and gauze in a homecare set up for the treatment of stage III and IV pressure ulcers up to complete healing. In addition, we assessed the overall economic burden on the Healthcare System. Treatment method for each patient was chosen randomly by using sealed opaque envelopes. The authors monitored the healing progress and recorded treatment costs without interfering with the treatment process. The healing progress was estimated by using surface measurement transparent films. To estimate treatment costs, the authors took into account labor costs, cost of dressings, as well the cost of other materials such as cleansing gauzes, normal saline, syringes, examination gloves, antiseptics and adhesive tape. The patient group under treatment with moist wound healing dressings consisted of 27 men and 20 women aged 75.1 ± 8,6 and had an average ulcer surface of 43.5 ± 30.70 cm(2) ; the patient group under treatment with gauze comprised 25 men and 23 women aged 77.02 ± 8.02 and had an average ulcer surface 41.52 ± 29.41 cm(2) (p = 0.25, 95% CI, Student's t test). The average healing time for the moist wound healing dressings group' was 85.56 ± 52.09 days, while 121.4 ± 52.21 days for the "gauze group" (p = 0.0001, 95% CI, Student's t test). The dressing change frequency per patient was reduced in the "moist wound healing dressings group," 49.5 ± 29.61, compared with a dressing change frequency per patient of 222.6 ± 101.86 for the "gauze group" (p = 0.0001, 95% CI, Student's t test). The use of moist wound healing dressings had a lower total treatment cost of 1,351 € per patient compared with, the use of gauzes (3,888 €).

Evaluación económica de un nuevo modelo de compra centralizada de apósitos: el caso del País Vasco / Economic evaluation of a new model of dressings centralized purchase: the case of the Basque Country

Solamente en apósitos para prevención y tratamiento de las heridas crónicas en Osakidetza-Servicio Vasco de Salud y el Departamento de Salud del Gobierno Vasco se invirtieron 7 millones de euros en 2009. Fue necesario el trabajo interdepartamental entre profesionales de enfermería expertos en este tipo de materiales y el Departamento de Suministros para llevar a cabo un concurso centralizado de apósitos y productos de cura en ambiente húmedo (APCAH). El objetivo de este trabajo es describir la nueva metodología seguida en el último concurso centralizado de estos materiales en el País Vasco, así como analizar el impacto económico que esto ha tenido en el gasto

Osakidetza-Basque Health Service and the Basque Health Department invested 7 million Euros in 2009 only in dressings for prevention and treatment of chronic wounds. Interdepartmental working among expert nurses at these products and the Supply Department to conduct a centralized purchase of dressing and products for moisture enviroment in wounds (DPMEW). The aim is to describe the new methodology followed in the last centralized purchase of DPMEW in the Basque Country, and also analyze the economic impact that this has had on expense

Aquacel(®) Ag dressing versus Acticoat™ dressing in partial thickness burns: a prospective, randomized, controlled study in 100 patients. Part 1: burn wound healing.

INTRODUCTION: Studies comparing contemporary silver dressings in burns are scarce. METHODS: In a prospective, randomized, controlled study, counting 50 patients/research group, we compared two frequently used silver dressings, Acticoat™ and Aquacel(®) Ag, in the management of partial thickness burns with a predicted healing time between 7 and 21 days as assessed by laser Doppler imaging between 48 and 72h after burn. Variables investigated were related to baseline research group characteristics, wound healing, bacteriology, economics, nurse, and patient experience. RESULTS: Both research groups were comparably composed taking into account gender, age and burn characteristics. Similar results were obtained as to healing time and bacterial control with both silver dressings. A statistically significant difference in favor of the Aquacel(®) Ag dressing was found for average ease of use (p<0.001), average ease of application (p=0.001), patient pain (p<0.001), patient comfort with the dressing (p=0.017), silver staining (p<0.001), and cost effectiveness (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Both silver dressings resulted in comparable healing times and bacterial control but the Aquacel(®) Ag dressing significantly increased comfort for patients as well as nurses and was significantly more cost-effective than the Acticoat™ dressing for the given indication.

[Modern wound dressings]. / Suvremena pokrivala za rane.

Chronic wounds are, due to the slow healing, a major clinical problem. In addition to classic materials, a great number of supportive wound dressings for chronic wound treatment, developed on the basis of new knowledge about the pathophysiological events in non-healing wounds, are available on the market. Today we know that modern wound dressings provide the best local environment for optimal healing (moisture, warmth, appropriate pH). Wound dressings control the amount of exudate from the wound and bacterial load, thus protecting local skin from the wound exudate and the wound from secondary infections from the environment. Using supportive wound dressings makes sense only when the wound has been properly assessed, the etiologic factors have been clarified and the obstacles making the wound chronic identified. The choice of dressing is correlated with the characteristics of the wound, the knowledge and experience of the medical staff, and the patient's needs. We believe that the main advantage of modern wound dressing versus conventional dressing is more effective wound cleaning, simple dressing application, painless bandaging owing to reduced adhesion to the wound, and increased absorption of the wound exudate. Faster wound granulation shortens the length of patient hospitalization, and eventually facilitates the work of medical staff. The overall cost of treatment is a minor issue due to faster wound healing despite the fact that modern supportive wound dressings are more expensive than conventional bandaging. The article describes different types of modern supportive wound dressings, as well as their characteristics and indications for use.

Evaluation of a non-adherent, povidone-iodine dressing in a case series of chronic wounds.

Here we report a product evaluation for a non-adherent, povidone-iodine (PVP-I) dressing, determining the clinical need for the product, performing a literature review, clinical evaluation and cost-analysis, and developing a recommendation. This evaluation included 20 patients who experienced dressing pain with the previous antimicrobial dressing. Two patients discontinued the evaluation and four ulcers were non-healing; the remaining wounds closed with the PVP-I dressing. Patients indicated a preference for the PVP-I dressing, primarily due to lack of dressing pain. The PVP-I dressing was also the most cost-efficient.

A randomized comparison study of Aquacel Ag and Glucan II as donor site dressings with regard to healing time, cosmesis, infection rate, and patient's perceived pain: a pilot study.

This study was undertaken to compare pain, healing time, infection rate, and cosmetic outcome between Aquacel Ag (Convatec) and Glucan II (Brennan Medical) as donor site dressings. The authors performed a prospective, randomized, patient-controlled study. Eligible patients had two donor sites harvested. One site was dressed with Aquacel Ag and the other site with Glucan II. Patients were followed at set time points for 6 months to determine the rate of epithelialization, patient's perceived pain, infection rate, and the cosmetic outcome. A total of 20 patients were enrolled in the study. All patient data were collected through reepithelialization. The average time to wound healing for Aquacel Ag was 12.5 ± 2.07 days compared with Glucan II 12.7 ± 1.99 days. Perceived pain scores for each donor site were recorded. On postoperative day 5, patients reported significantly less pain with the Aquacel Ag site (Aquacel Ag 1.75 vs Glucan II 2.5, P = .02). Three donor sites showed clinical signs of infection (two Glucan II and one Aquacel Ag) prompting culture and dressing removal. There was no statistically significant difference in cosmetic outcomes of the donor sites at any time point. When comparing Aquacel Ag and Glucan II, our study has determined that there is no significant difference with regard to healing time, infection rates, and cosmetic outcomes. Both dressings are comparable with regard to ease of application and postoperative care.

Comparative safety and costs of transparent versus gauze wound dressings in intravenous catheterization.

The type of dressing selected for intravascular catheters may influence costs and complications. We carried out a clinical trial to compare the safety and costs of transparent and gauze dressings. We did not find differences in complication rates between transparent (34.1%) and gauze (26.5%) dressings (P = .62). The total cost per patient was $24.82 for transparent and $38.85 for gauze. The results indicate similar safety but increased cost associated with gauze dressings.

Economic and clinical contributions of an antimicrobial barrier dressing: a strategy for the reduction of surgical site infections.

OBJECTIVE: In patients at risk of surgical site infection (SSI), there is evidence that an antimicrobial barrier dressing (Acticoat* ) applied immediately post-procedure is effective in reducing the incidence of infection. The objective of this study was to assess when it is appropriate to use an antimicrobial barrier dressing rather than a post-operative film dressing, by evaluating the net cost and budget impact of the two strategies. METHODS: An economic model was developed, which estimates expected expenditure on dressings and the expected costs of surgical site infection during the initial inpatient episode, based on published literature on the pre-discharge costs of surgical infection and the efficacy of an antimicrobial barrier dressing in preventing SSI. RESULTS: At an SSI risk of 10%, an antimicrobial barrier dressing strategy is cost neutral if the incidence of infection is reduced by at least 9% compared with a post-operative film dressing. At 35% efficacy, expenditure on dressings would be higher by £30,760 per 1000 patients, and the cost of treating infection would be lower by £111,650, resulting in a net cost saving of £80,890. The break-even infection risk for cost neutrality is 2.6%. LIMITATIONS: Although this cost analysis is based on published data, there are limitations in methodology: the model is dependent on and subject to the limitations of the data used to populate it. Further studies would be useful to increase the robustness of the conclusions, particularly in a broader range of surgical specialties. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy involving the use of an antimicrobial barrier dressing in patients at moderate (5-10%) or high (>10%) risk of infection appears reasonable and cost saving in light of the available clinical evidence.

Use of Hydrofilm and Hydrofilm Plus in the community: an assessment.

The aim of this article was to critically examine the case for using film dressings with a particular emphasis on two dressing manufactured by Paul Hartmann Ltd: Hydrofilm and Hydrofilm Plus. The authors undertook a review of the current published evidence and present four case studies where Hydrofilm and Hydrofilm Plus were used in the community setting.

[The Biobrane glove in burn wounds of the hand. Evaluation of the functional and aesthetic outcome and comparison of costs with those of conventional wound management]. / Der Biobrane-Handschuh bei Verbrennungen der Hand. Bewertung des funktionellen und kosmetischen Ergebnisses und Kostenvergleich zur konventionellen Therapie.

BACKGROUND: While use of biocomposite temporary dressings in burn wounds is common practice, the complex anatomic structures of the hand make this treatment option challenging. For this reason, the Biobrane ((R)) Glove (Smith&Nephew) has been developed. However, limited information regarding burn treatment with Biobrane ((R)) Gloves can be found in the literature. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Functional and cosmetic outcomes of 13 second degree burn wounds of the hand in 10 patients treated with Biobrane ((R)) Gloves were evaluated using the Vancouver scar scale (VSS) and the DASH-score (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand). We evaluated wound healing times and questioned patients about pain related to Biobrane ((R)) Glove treatment in comparison to conventionally managed second degree burn wounds in other parts of the body and about acceptance of Biobrane ((R)) Glove treatment. In addition, we estimated the costs for use and wound management time for both Biobrane ((R)) Glove treatment and conventional wound management for 14 days. RESULTS: Burn wounds treated with Biobrane ((R)) Gloves had excellent functional and cosmetic outcomes [DASH score median of 0 (min. 0; max. 3.33) and VSS median of 3 (min. 0; max. 5)]. Wound healing times were lower (mean 9 days). According to patients' response to overall acceptance, 90% responded as being "very satisfied" with Biobrane ((R)) Glove treatment and 75% responded that Biobrane ((R)) Glove treatment was "much less painful" compared to conventional burn management. The material costs of the Biobrane ((R)) Glove treatment, over 14 days, were approx. double compared to conventional wound management costs. In contrast, the time required for conventional wound management over 14 days was four times longer than for treatment with Biobrane ((R)) Gloves. Thus, taking personnel expenses into consideration, total costs of Biobrane ((R)) Glove treatment are comparable to those of conventional wound management. CONCLUSION: Biobrane ((R)) Glove treatment of hand burns resulted in excellent functional and cosmetic outcomes, reduced pain compared to conventional wound management and high overall patient satisfaction. In conjunction with a significant reduction in wound management time, the Biobrane ((R)) Glove is an important and cost neutral tool in the treatment of second degree burn wounds of the hand.

Preventing pressure ulcers on the heel: a Canadian cost study.

An adaptation of a clinical study of 130 patients at risk of developing a pressure ulcer on the heels was performed using Canadian costs. The aim of the study was to compare the cost effectiveness of a specially shaped hydrocellular dressing (Allevyn Heel) versus that of a protective heel bandage (Soffban and gauze) in pressure ulcer prevention over an 8-week period.

Randomized controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis of silver-donating antimicrobial dressings for venous leg ulcers (VULCAN trial).

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial silver dressings are used beneath graduated compression in the treatment of venous ulceration. There is little information on whether their use is effective. This was a prospective randomized trial and cost-effectiveness analysis of silver-donating versus non-silver low-adherence dressings in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. METHODS: Patients were randomized between the two types of dressing. The primary outcome measure was complete ulcer healing at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included time to healing, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: A total of 213 patients were recruited. There was no difference between the dressings in the proportion of ulcers healed at 12 weeks (59.6 per cent for silver and 56.7 per cent for control dressings). Mean utility scores for the EuroQol 5D and Short Form 6D were similar in both groups at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Compared with the control group the antimicrobial group had an incremental cost of pounds sterling 97.85 and an incremental quality-adjusted life year gain of 0.0002, giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of pounds sterling 489 250 for the antimicrobial dressings. CONCLUSION: No significant differences were found in either primary or secondary endpoints. There was no evidence to support the routine use of silver-donating dressings beneath compression for venous ulceration. REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN 72485131 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

The use of Atrauman non-adherent wound dressing in tissue viability.

This product focus considers the characteristics and application of Atrauman, a non-adherent dressing, in relation to the different aspects of wound healing. Atrauman has many characteristics that make it an ideal dressing choice in a number of clinical scenarios, including: pain free removal; promotion of healthy granulation tissue; cost effectiveness and versatility.

Enhancing patient outcomes--reducing the bottom line: the use of antimicrobial soft silicone foam dressing in home health.

According to the Tabor's Medical Dictionary (2005), bioburden is the number of contaminating microorganisms present on an object, such as a wound. Bioburden is a serious concern for wound care clinicians as it has been well-documented that bioburden may delay wound healing, increase pain and result in increased cost of treatment. Symptoms of bioburden include a delay in wound healing, increase in exudate and odor, a red bright wound bed with exuberant granulation tissue that bleeds readily (Sibbald et al., 2006), and persistence or development of necrotic tissue. Silver dressings are increasingly used in wound care to reduce bioburden. Silver provides potent broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity. When placed in contact with organic molecules, such as wound fluid or tissue that contain proteins or a broad spectrum of microorganisms, silver ions react with the microorganisms (Bolton, 2006).