Back to Journals » ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research » Volume 9

Economic analysis and budget impact of clostridial collagenase ointment compared with medicinal honey for treatment of pressure ulcers in the US

Authors Mearns ES, Liang M, Limone BL, Gilligan AM, Miller JD, Schaum KD, Waycaster CR

Received 3 February 2017

Accepted for publication 14 April 2017

Published 16 August 2017 Volume 2017:9 Pages 485—494

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S133847

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Dr Akshita Wason

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Professor Giorgio Lorenzo Colombo

Elizabeth S Mearns,1 Michael Liang,1 Brendan L Limone,1 Adrienne M Gilligan,1 Jeffrey D Miller,1 Kathleen D Schaum,2 Curtis R Waycaster2

1
Truven Health Analytics, an IBM Company, Cambridge, MA, USA; 2Smith & Nephew, Inc., Fort Worth, TX, USA

Objectives: Pressure ulcer (PU) treatment poses significant clinical and economic challenges to health-care systems. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of enzymatic debridement with clostridial collagenase ointment (CCO) compared with autolytic debridement with medicinal honey (MH) for PU treatment from a US payer/Medicare perspective in the hospital outpatient department setting.
Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis using a Markov model was developed using a 1-week cycle length across a 1-year time horizon. The three health states were inflammation/senescence, granulation/proliferation (ie, patients achieving 100% granulation), and epithelialization. Data sources included the US Wound Registry, Medicare fee schedules, and other published clinical and cost studies about PU treatment.
Results: In the base case analysis over a 1-year time horizon, CCO was the economically dominant strategy (ie, simultaneously conferring greater benefit at less cost). Patients treated with CCO experienced 22.7 quality-adjusted life weeks (QALWs) at a cost of $6,161 over 1 year, whereas MH patients experienced 21.9 QALWs at a cost of $7,149. Patients treated with CCO achieved 11.5 granulation weeks and 6.0 epithelization weeks compared with 10.6 and 4.4 weeks for MH, respectively. The number of clinic visits was 40.1 for CCO vs 43.4 for MH, and the number of debridements was 12.3 for CCO compared with 17.6 for MH. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses determined CCO dominant in 72% of 10,000 iterations and cost-effective in 91%, assuming a benchmark willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/quality-adjusted life year ($962/QALW). The budget impact analysis showed that for every 1% of patients shifted from MH to CCO, a cost savings of $9,883 over 1 year for a cohort of 1,000 patients was observed by the payer.
Conclusion: The results of these economic analyses suggest that CCO is a cost-effective, economically dominant alternative to MH in the treatment of patients with PUs in the hospital outpatient department setting.

Keywords: cost-effectiveness, budget impact, pressure ulcer, debridement, clostridial collagenase, outpatient

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]