Mallow Peter J, Hiebert John M, Robson Martin C
Xavier University.
University of Missouri-Kansas City.
J Health Econ Outcomes Res. 2021 Nov 1;8(2):76-81. doi: 10.36469/001c.28429. eCollection 2021.
Low-frequency ultrasound debridement with irrigation is an effective method of wound bed preparation. A recent clinical study compared hypochlorous acid preserved wound cleanser (HAPWOC) to saline and found HAPWOC to be a more effective adjunct to low frequency ultrasound debridement. However, HAPWOC has an added cost. The primary objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of HAPWOC as an irrigation modality with low-frequency ultrasound debridement for the treatment of severely complex wounds that were destined to be closed primarily via a flap. The secondary objective of this study was to estimate the number needed to treat (NNT) to avoid a wound-related complication and its expected cost per NNT. A patient-level Monte-Carlo simulation model was used to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis from the US health system perspective. All clinical data were obtained from a prospective clinical trial. Cost data were obtained from the publicly available data sources in 2021 US dollars. The effect measure was the avoidance of wound-related complications at 14-days post-debridement. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), a measure of the additional cost per benefit. The secondary outcomes were the NNT and expected cost per NNT to avoid one complication (complementary to the ICER in assessing cost-effectiveness). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to gauge the robustness and reliability of the results. The ICER for HAPWOC versus saline irrigation was US$90.85 per wound complication avoided. The expected incremental cost per patient in the study and effect was US$49.97 with 55% relative reduction in wound-related complications at day 14 post debridement procedure. The NNT and cost per NNT were 2 and US$99.94, respectively. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that these results were robust to variation in model parameters. HAPWOC was a cost-effective strategy for the treatment of complex wounds during ultrasonic debridement. For every two patients treated with HAPWOC, one complication was avoided.
低频超声清创联合冲洗是一种有效的伤口床准备方法。最近一项临床研究将次氯酸保存的伤口清洁剂(HAPWOC)与生理盐水进行了比较,发现HAPWOC是低频超声清创更有效的辅助手段。然而,HAPWOC成本更高。本研究的主要目的是评估HAPWOC作为低频超声清创冲洗方式治疗严重复杂伤口(这些伤口主要通过皮瓣一期闭合)的成本效益。本研究的次要目的是估计避免伤口相关并发症所需治疗的患者数量(NNT)及其每NNT的预期成本。采用患者水平的蒙特卡洛模拟模型,从美国卫生系统的角度进行成本效益分析。所有临床数据均来自一项前瞻性临床试验。成本数据来自2021年美元的公开数据源。效果指标是清创后14天避免伤口相关并发症。主要结果是增量成本效益比(ICER),即每获得一份益处的额外成本。次要结果是NNT和避免一种并发症的每NNT预期成本(在评估成本效益方面与ICER互补)。进行了确定性和概率敏感性分析(PSA),以评估结果的稳健性和可靠性。与生理盐水冲洗相比,HAPWOC的ICER为每避免一例伤口并发症90.85美元。在本研究中,每位患者的预期增量成本和效果为49.97美元,清创术后14天伤口相关并发症相对减少55%。NNT和每NNT成本分别为2和9