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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2017 Feb;26(1):79-84.
doi: 10.1016/j.jtv.2016.06.001. Epub 2016 Jun 8.

Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a pilot study of prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a pilot study of prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy

Christopher Heard et al. J Tissue Viability. 2017 Feb.

Abstract

Background: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is increasingly used prophylactically following surgery despite limited evidence of clinical or cost-effectiveness.

Objective: To evaluate whether NPWT is cost-effective compared to standard care, for the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) in obese women undergoing elective caesarean section, and inform development of a larger trial.

Methods: An economic evaluation was conducted alongside a pilot randomised controlled trial at one Australian hospital, in which women were randomised to NPWT (n = 44) or standard care (n = 43). A public health care provider perspective and time horizon to four weeks post-discharge was adopted. Cost-effectiveness assessment was based on incremental cost per SSI prevented and per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.

Results: Patients receiving NPWT each received health care costing AU$5887 (±1038) and reported 0.069 (±0.010) QALYs compared to AU$5754 (±1484) and 0.066 (±0.010) QALYs for patients receiving standard care. NPWT may be slightly more costly and more effective than standard care, with estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of AU$1347 (95%CI dominant- $41,873) per SSI prevented and AU$42,340 (95%CI dominant- $884,019) per QALY gained. However, there was considerable uncertainty around these estimates.

Conclusions: NPWT may be cost-effective in the prophylactic treatment of surgical wounds following elective caesarean section in obese women. Larger trials could clarify the cost-effectiveness of NPWT as a prophylactic treatment for SSI. Sensitive capture of QALYs and cost offsets will be important given the high level of uncertainty around the point estimate cost-effectiveness ratio which was close to conventional thresholds.

Australian and new zealand trial registration number: ACTRN12612000171819.

Keywords: Caesarean section; Cost-effectiveness analysis; Negative pressure wound therapy; Surgical site infection; Wounds.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources