| アブストラクト | OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of using two different reduced pressure compression systems in treating newly diagnosed venous leg ulcers (VLUs) in clinical practice, from the perspective of the UK's National Health Service (NHS). METHODS: This was a modelling study based on a retrospective cohort analysis of the case records of patients with a newly diagnosed VLU, randomly extracted from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database, who were initially treated with a two-layer cohesive compression bandage (TLCCB Lite; Coban 2 Lite, 3M, US) or a two-layer compression system (TLCS Reduced; Ktwo Reduced, Urgo, France). No significant differences were detected between the groups. Nevertheless, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was performed to enable differences in patients' outcomes between the groups to be adjusted for any heterogeneity in baseline covariates. Clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the alternative compression systems were estimated over 12 months after starting treatment. RESULTS: Time from wound onset to starting compression was a mean of two months. The probability of healing at 12 months was 0.59 in the TLCCB Lite group and 0.53 in the TLCS Reduced group. Patients in the TLCCB Lite group experienced a marginally better health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of 0.02 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient compared to those in the TLCS Reduced group. The 12-month NHS wound management cost was pound3883 per patient treated with TLCCB Lite and pound4235 per patient treated with TLCS Reduced. When the analysis was repeated without ANCOVA, the findings from the base case analysis remained unchanged (i.e., use of TLCCB Lite improved outcomes at lower cost). CONCLUSION: Within the study's limitations, treating newly diagnosed VLUs with TLCCB Lite instead of TLCS Reduced potentially affords a cost-effective use of NHS-funded resources in clinical practice, since it is expected to result in an increased healing rate, better HRQoL and a lower NHS wound management cost. |
|---|
