SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
The International Journal of Lower Extremity Wounds
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Franks, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Bosanquet, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Franks, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by Bosanquet, N.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Reviews

Cost-Effectiveness: Seeking Value for Money in Lower Extremity Wound Management

Peter J. Franks, PhD

Centre for Research & Implementation of Clinical Practice, Faculty of Health & Human Sciences, Thames Valley University, London

Nick Bosanquet, MA

Health Policy Unit, Imperial College, Bagrit Centre, London

This article discusses the different methods of evaluating cost in relation to the outcomes of treatment, and reviews the evidence of cost-effectiveness (CE) in the management of chronic leg ulceration. In essence, the CE argument revolves around the need to demonstrate outcomes of treatment in relation to particular levels of financial input by the health providers. High CE allows for either the same number of patients to be treatedmore efficiently (at a lower cost) ormore patients to be treated for the same financial input. Areview ofmedical and nursing databases (Medline, Embase, and Cinahl) identified studies of CE of dressing materials (n = 8), use of compression therapy (n = 4), and other treatments (n = 2). In addition, 5 research groups have undertaken studies to evaluate the relative CE of different systems of care. Overall conclusionsare that modern wound dressings provide a more costeffective alternative to saline gauze, whereas the evidence relating to the use of tissue-engineered skin is less clear. The use of compression bandaging is substantially more costeffective when compared with a system of care where compression is not systematically offered. The systems that offer compression are not only cost-effective but also lead to reductions in absolute cost. The evaluation of CE is likely to become an ever-increasing part of wound care evaluation as we strive to achieve greater efficiency in the use of scarce health resources.

Key Words: cost-effectiveness • review • leg ulceration • bandages • dressings • service development

The International Journal of Lower Extremity Wounds, Vol. 3, No. 2, 87-95 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1534734604264864
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 INT J LOW EXTREM WOUNDSHome page
P. Trueman and J. Posnett
What Price Wound Care?
International Journal of Lower Extremity Wounds, December 1, 2006; 5(4): 230 - 232.
[PDF]