Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by secondary intention is not cost-effective.

BACKGROUND

Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been used in clinical practice for surgical wounds healing by secondary intention (SWHSI), despite limited evidence regarding its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of NPWT for SWHSI, compared with standard dressings, from the perspective of the UK healthcare system.

METHODS

An economic model was used to extrapolate the effectiveness results of a meta-analysis over a patient's lifetime and estimate the costs and outcomes (quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)) of NPWT and standard dressings. The probability of NPWT being cost-effective was estimated, with extensive scenario analyses conducted to evaluate the robustness of results and the degree of uncertainty.

RESULTS

On average, NPWT was associated with higher costs and marginally higher QALYs than standard dressings. The cost difference was mainly driven by the additional intervention costs associated with NPWT. The estimated probability of NPWT being cost-effective was <30%. There was considerable uncertainty in the findings, driven largely by uncertainty in the estimated pooled relative effect from the meta-analysis. Results were robust to different scenario analyses.

CONCLUSION

No evidence was found demonstrating that NPWT was a cost-effective alternative to standard dressings for SWHSI.