Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2005 Sep;2(3):272-81.
doi: 10.1111/j.1742-4801.2005.00130.x.

Economic comparison of methods of wound closure: wound closure strips vs. sutures and wound adhesives

William T Zempsky  1 , Cindy L Zehrer, Christopher T Lyle, Edwin C Hedbloom
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Economic comparison of methods of wound closure: wound closure strips vs. sutures and wound adhesives

William T Zempsky et al. Int Wound J. 2005 Sep.

Abstract

Our objective was to review and assess the treatment of low-tension wounds and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of wound closure methods. We used a health economic model to estimate cost/closure of adhesive wound closure strips, tissue adhesives and sutures. The model incorporated cost-driving variables: application time, costs and the likelihood and costs of dehiscence and infection. The model was populated with variable estimates derived from the literature. Cost estimates and cosmetic results were compared. Parameter values were estimated using national healthcare and labour statistics. Sensitivity analyses were used to verify the results. Our analysis suggests that adhesive wound closure strips had the lowest average cost per laceration ($7.54), the lowest cost per infected laceration ($53.40) and the lowest cost per laceration with dehiscence ($25.40). The costs for sutures were $24.11, $69.91 and $41.91, respectively; the costs for tissue adhesives were $28.77, $74.68 and $46.68, respectively. The cosmetic outcome for all three treatments was equivalent. We conclude adhesive wound closure strips were both a cost-saving and a cost-effective alternative to sutures and tissue adhesives in the closure of low-tension lacerations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Economic model schematic.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. McCaig LF, Burt CW. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2002 Emergency Department Summary. Advance data from vital and health statistics; no.340. Hyattsville, Maryland: National Center for Health Statistics, 2004. - PubMed
    1. Applebaum JS, Zalut T, Applebaum D. The use of tissue adhesion for traumatic laceration repair in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 1993;. 22 (7):1190–2. - PubMed
    1. Autio L, Olson KK. The four S's of wound management: staples, sutures, steri‐strips, and sticky stuff. Holist Nurs Pract 2002;. 16(2):80–8. - PubMed
    1. Bruns TB, Robinson BS, Smith RJ, Kile DL, Davis TP, Sullivan KM, Quinn JV. A new tissue adhesive for laceration repair in children. J Pediatr 1998;. 132(6):1067–70. - PubMed
    1. Bruns TB, Worthington JM. Using tissue adhesive for wound repair: a practical guide to dermabond. Am Fam Physician 2000;. 61(5):1383–8. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances