Objective: To demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of the moist environment dressings treatment over the Traditional Cure (TC), in hospitalized patients, with Pressure Ulcers (UPP) categories I and II. Methods: This is a comparative, randomized, open-label, longitudinal study, comprising 60 patients, divided into two groups, treated and followed for four weeks. The sample size was calculated based upon the meta-analysis by Heyer. We built a decision tree to compare the cost-effectiveness of each therapy. Data were collected directly from patients' case report forms and costs extracted from hospital records. Additionally, we performed sensitivity and incremental cost-effectiveness analyses. Results: The analysis showed a dominance of advanced therapy over traditional therapy (€ 223.00/0.84 vs. € 298.00/0.51), as it was more cost-effective at the end of the study. Hospitalization was shorter in the advanced therapy and healing was achieved in fewer days than the traditional therapy. Conclusions: Advanced therapy with healing products in a humid environment is more cost-effective than traditional therapy when applied to hospitalized patients with category I and II pressure ulcers.
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.
CITATION STYLE
Castañeda, M. del C. P., Jiménez, G. P., Flores, L. S., Arenas, J. E. B., Jiménez, P. H., Angulo, M. V. X., & Mier, G. M. (2021). Cost-effectiveness of advanced therapy with moist environment dressings compared to traditional therapy in the treatment of Stage I and II pressure ulcers. Gerokomos, 32(3), 199–204. https://doi.org/10.4321/S1134-928X2021000400012