Cost-effectiveness of wound management in France: pressure ulcers and venous leg ulcers.

OBJECTIVES

This study set out to define realistic protocols of care for the treatment of chronic venous leg ulcers and pressure ulcers in France and, by developing cost-effectiveness models, to compare the different protocols of care for the two ulcer groups, enabling a calculation of direct medical costs per ulcer healed in a typical French health insurance plan.

METHOD

Clinical outcomes and some treatment patterns were obtained from published literature. Validations of different treatment patterns were developed using an expert consensus panel similar to the Delphi approach. Costs were calculated based on national averages and estimates from the UK and Germany. The models were used to measure costs per healed ulcer over a 12-week period.

RESULTS

For both the pressure ulcer and venous leg ulcer models, three protocols of care were identified. For pressure ulcers and venous leg ulcers, the hydrocolloid DuoDERM (ConvaTec, also known as Granuflex in the UK and Varihesive in Germany) was most cost-effective in France.

CONCLUSION

The combination of published data and expert consensus opinion is a valid technique, and in this case suggests that treating pressure ulcers and venous leg ulcers with hydrocolloid dressings is more cost-effective than treating them with saline gauze, in spite of the lower unit cost of the latter.