...
首页> 外文期刊>International wound journal. >A budget impact analysis comparing a Hydrofiber?; dressing to an alginate dressing in managing exuding venous leg ulcers in France
【24h】

A budget impact analysis comparing a Hydrofiber?; dressing to an alginate dressing in managing exuding venous leg ulcers in France

机译:预算影响分析比较了Hydrofiber?在法国处理藻类敷料以治疗渗出的腿部静脉溃疡

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

An Excel model was developed to compare total costs (including primary and secondary dressings only) of Hydrofiber?; dressing (2010 branded price) versus an alginate dressing (generic or branded price) in managing exuding venous leg ulcers considering mean wear time and mean duration of exudate management phase, from the French Social Security perspective over 5 years (2011-2015). Budget impact (based on prevalence of venous leg ulcers in France) was estimated as the difference between scenario 1 (Hydrofiber?; versus alginate dressing usage proportion increasing slightly per year) and Scenario2 (proportion remaining at 2010 levels). Annual costs and net savings per patient for the dressings were calculated in analyses 1 and 2. Analysis 1 (28-day mean exudate management phase for both Hydrofiber?; and alginate dressing groups): total costs 66·82? Hydrofiber?;, 70·08? generic alginate, 77·0? branded alginate; net savings 3·26? and 10·18? for Hydrofiber?; versus generic and branded alginate. Analysis 2 (mean exudate management phase of 22·2 versus 28 days for Hydrofiber?; versus alginate): total costs 52·92?, 70·08? and 77·0?, and net savings 17·10? and 24·02?, accordingly. Total cost savings (budget impact scenario 1 minus scenario 2): Analysis 1 - 223 107? and 696 304? for Hydrofiber?; versus generic and branded alginate dressings, respectively; Analysis 2 - 1 169 845? and 1 643 042? accordingly. Sensitivity analyses indicated that results are reliable. This conservative analysis shows that effective exudate management using Hydrofiber?; dressing can produce sizeable cost savings.
机译:开发了一个Excel模型来比较Hydrofiber?的总成本(仅包括初级和次级敷料)?从法国社会保障的角度(5年以上,2011年至2015年),在考虑渗出期平均磨损时间和渗出液管理阶段的平均持续时间的情况下,应对渗出性腿部溃疡进行敷料(2010年品牌价格)与藻酸盐敷料(通用或品牌价格)之间的比较。预算影响(基于法国静脉曲张溃疡的患病率)估计为方案1(Hydrofiber ?;与藻酸盐敷料的使用比例每年略有增加)和方案2(比例保持在2010年水平)之间的差异。在分析1和2中计算了敷料的年成本和每位患者的净节省。分析1(Hydrofiber?和藻酸盐敷料组的28天平均渗出液管理阶段):总费用66·82?水力纤维?; 70·08?普通藻酸盐77·0?品牌藻酸盐;净储蓄3·26?和10·18?用于水纤维?与普通和品牌藻酸盐相比。分析2(平均渗出液管理阶段为22·2,而水纤维为28天;藻酸盐为):总成本52·92?,70·08?和77·0 ?,和净储蓄17·10?和24·02?总节省成本(预算影响方案1减去方案2):分析1-223107?和696304?用于水纤维?分别与普通和品牌藻酸盐敷料相比;分析2-1169845?和1 643 042?相应地。敏感性分析表明结果是可靠的。这种保守的分析表明,使用Hydrofiber可以有效地管理分泌液?敷料可以节省大量成本。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号