Wound care product | Source: author, country, year | Type of ulcers | Interventions | Perspective | Type of econ. eval. | Primary outcome measures/source of effectiveness evidence | Cost-effectiveness results (base case) | Sources of funding | Evidence |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Skin Substitutes | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | |
Apligraf® a | AÉTMIS, CA, 2000 | Venous leg | (1) Compression alone (2) Compression plus Apligraf® simultaneously (3) Compression plus Apligraf® for hard-to-heal ulcers | Societal/health care system | CEAg | Number of ulcer days averted/Falanga et al. 1998 | The incremental cost per ulcer day averted of compression and Apligraf® simultaneously used vs. compression alone was Can $26 (US $22)d, and Can $22 (US $18)d when Apligraf® was restricted to hard-to-heal ulcers. The price year was not reported. | Not stated | Limitedh, i |
 | Harding et al., UK, 2000 | Venous leg | (1) Saline gauze (2) Granuflex® e (3) Apligraf® | Health care payer | CEAg | 12-week healing rate/literature review | The cost per wound healed was £541 (US $828)d for saline gauze, £341 (US $522)d for Granuflex®, and £6,741 (US $10,323)d for Apligraf. The price year was 1999. | ConvaTec |  |
 | Kerstein et al., US, 2001 | Venous leg | (1) Impregnated gauze (2) DuoDERM® f (3) Apligraf® | Health care payer | CEAg | Number of persons healed/not healed after 12 weeks/literature review | The cost per patient healed was US $2,939 for impregnated gauze, US $1,873 for DuoDERM®, and US $15,053 for Apligraf®. The price year was 2000. | ConvaTec |  |
 | Meaume/Gemmen, FR, 2002 | Venous leg | (1) Saline gauze (2) DuoDERM® f (3) Apligraf® | Health care payer | CEAg | Number of persons healed/not healed after 12 weeks/literature review | The cost per patient healed was £1,722 (US $1,832)d for saline gauze, £1,018 (US $1,083)d for DuoDERM®, and £ 15,920 (US $16,936)d for Apligraf®. The price year was 1999/2000. | ConvaTec |  |
 | Steinberg et al. US, 2002 | Diabetic foot | (1) Saline-moistened gauze alone (2) Saline-moistened gauze plus Apligraf® | Health care payer | CEA | Number of ulcer-free months gained, number of amputations or resections avoided/Veves et al. 2001 | The incremental cost of Apligraf® vs. control per ulcer-free month gained was US $6,683, and US $86,226 when amputations or resections avoided were considered as benefit measures. The price year was 2000. | Novartis |  |
Dermagraft® b | Segal/John, AU, 2002 | Diabetic foot | (1) Convent. management alone (2) Convent. management plus Dermagraft® | Health care payer | CEAg | Number of healed weeks/Naughton et al. 1997 | The incremental cost per additional healed week of Dermagraft® vs. control was A $383 (US $292)d. The price year was 2000. | Smith + Nephew Pty. Ltd. | Limitedh, i, j |
Growth Factors | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | |
Becaplermin (Regranex® c) | Ghatnekar et al., UK, 2000 | Diabetic foot | (1) Good wound care (GWC) alone (2) GWC plus becaplermin | Health care system | CEAg | Number of ulcer days averted/Smiell et al. 1999 | Becaplermin plus GWC was found to be cost saving. The price year was not reported. | Not clearly stated | Good |
 | Ghatnekar et al., CH/FR/SE/UK, 2001 | Diabetic foot | (1) GWC alone (2) GWC plus becaplermin | Health care system | CEAg | Number of ulcer-free months gained/Smiell et al. 1999 | Becaplermin plus GWC was found to be cost saving in Sweden, Switzerland and the UK. The incremental cost per ulcer-free month gained of becaplermin over GWC alone was US $19 in France. The price year was 1999. | R.W. Johnson Pharmaceutical Research Institute |  |
 | Kantor/Margolis, US, 2001 | Diabetic foot | (1) Standard care at a primary care setting (SC) (2) Standard treatment at a specialised wound care centre (WCC) (3) Treatment with platelet releasate at a wound care centre (PR) (4) Becaplermin | Health care payer | CEAg | Percentage of ulcers healed after 20 weeks/Wieman 1998 | The incremental cost per additional 1% of ulcers healed (most expensive vs. least expensive) was US $36.59 (SC vs. becaplermin), and US $70.86 (becaplermin vs. WCC). Becaplermin dominated PR. The price year was 1999. | Curative Health Services, National Institutes of Health Geriatric Epidemiology |  |
 | Persson et al. SE, 2000 | Diabetic foot | (1) GWC alone (2) GWC plus becaplermin | Health care system | CEAg | Number of ulcer-months avoided/Smiell et al. 1999 | Becaplermin plus GWC was found to be cost saving. The price year was 1999. | R.W. Johnson Pharmaceutical Research Institute |  |
 | Sibbald et al., CA, 2003 | Diabetic foot | (1) Best clinical care (BCC) alone (2) BCC plus becaplermin | Societal | CEAg | Number of ulcer days averted/Wieman et al. 1998 | The ICER was Can $6 (US $5)d. The costs were estimated in 1998 and updated to 2002 costs using the Canadian Consumer Price Index for Personal and Health Care. | Janssen-Ortho Inc. |  |