More cost-effective wound healing Negative Pressure Wound Therapy

Transcription

1 More cost-effective wound healing Negative Pressure Wound Therapy

2 V.A.C. Therapy is proven to deliver faster, more effective wound healing. 1-4 Could wound management be made more cost-effective? 3 ways to demonstrate the cost effectiveness of V.A.C. Therapy: 1 Randomised Controlled Trials 2 Everyday clinical practice 3 Using your own data 2

3 3

4 1RCTs 1 that demonstrate V.A.C. Therapy delivers economic benefit V.A.C. Therapy cuts treatment costs by a third 5 Treatment costs cut by $12,852 using V.A.C. Therapy. 5 $ CONTROL $ V.A.C THERAPY 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 USD ($) A Randomised Controlled Trial of 162 patients using V.A.C. Therapy treating diabetic foot wounds compared against advanced moist wound care. Graph adapted from: Apelqvist et al The American Journal of Surgery

5 V.A.C. Therapy reduces the cost of nursing time by almost 60% 6 Mean costs of nursing time 83 ± (58) 33 ± (31) CONTROL V.A.C THERAPY p < Nursing costs cut from 83 to Mean costs ( ) V.A.C. Therapy reduces the mean costs of hospitalisation by 30% 6 Mean costs of hospitalisation 2467 ± ( 1366) 1788 ± ( 1060) CONTROL V.A.C THERAPY p < 0.05 Hospitalisation costs cut by 679 per patient Mean costs ( ) Randomised control study of 54 patients presenting with pressure ulcers, trauma and chronic wounds. Both graphs adapted from: Moues et al J. Wound Care Pressure ulcer treatment costs Nursing time and hospitalisation are the main wound treatment costs. 7 Nursing time 71% Dressing costs 29% * * using V.A.C. GranuFoam Dressing 5

6 2 Everyday clinical practice An example of how V.A.C. Therapy can deliver economic benefits 58,926 saved in hospital costs 8 Annual hospital costs 207, ,814 Only standard treatment V.A.C. Therapy 30% reduction in overall costs ,000 64, , ,000 Costs ( ) 210,000 Material costs Care costs Hospital costs Intensive care costs 75 hospital days saved 8 Hospital days 287 Only standard treatment 212 V.A.C. Therapy 25% reduction in hospital days Days 300 An example demonstrating that V.A.C. Therapy delivered economic benefits of 8,418 per patient when used to treat 7 abdominal wounds in a 300-bed North Bavarian hospital, in Germany, over one year. Both graphs adapted from: KCI Times, Germany 2/ Internal data on file. 8 Real data used to calculate economic benefits 8 Standard treatment Hydrogels, alginates, other products including vicryl net or zipper hospital CoStS Costs per unit Hospital costs/day Nursing costs (hospital)/ hour % reduction (sternal) in time spent in hospital 27% % reduction (abdominal) in time spent in hospital 26% Flap surgery - costs Intensive care costs/day resources Standard V.A.C. Therapy Number of nursing staff Time taken to change dressing (min)

7 3 Using your data to demonstrate V.A.C. Therapy delivers economic benefits Budget Impact Model To quantify the economic benefits of V.A.C. Therapy Developed by The York Health Economics Consortium Based solely upon independently published and cited data Offered to users of V.A.C. Therapy at no cost Start today: ask for an introduction to the Budget Impact Model 7

8 Assess the impact of V.A.C. Therapy on your budget In 1 of 3 ways: Randomised Controlled Trials Showing that V.A.C. Therapy: Cuts treatment costs by a third. Cuts nursing time by almost 60%. Reduces mean costs of hospitalisation by 30%. Everyday Clinical Practice Demonstrating clearly how individual institutions and facilities are saving money by using V.A.C. Therapy. Using your own data Quantifying the savings you could make by broadening your use of V.A.C. Therapy. Discover how much you could save: Ask your local KCI representative for more details. Contact KCI today References 1. Hunter JE, Teot L, Horch R, Banwell PE. Evidence based medicine: vacuum-assisted closure in wound care management. International Wound Journal 2007, 4: Vuerstaek JD, Jeroen DD, Vainas T, Wuite J, Nelemans P, Neumann MHA, Veraart JCJM. State-of-the-art treatment of chronic leg ulcers: A randomized controlled trial comparing vacuum-assisted closure (V.A.C. ) with modern wound dressings. Journal of Vascular Surgery 2006, 44(5): Armstrong DG & Lavery LA. Negative Pressure Wound Therapy after partial Diabetic Foot Amputation: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2005, 366: Blume PA, Walters J, Payne W, Ayala J, Lantis J. Comparison of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy using Vacuum-assisted Closure with Advanced Moist Wound Therapy in the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcers. Diabetes Care 2008, 31: Apelqvist J, Armstrong DG, Lavery LA, Boulton AJM. Resource utilization and economic cost of care based on a randomized trial of Vacuum-assisted Closure therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot wounds. The American Journal of Surgery 2008, 195(6): Moues CM, van den Bemd GJ, Meerding WJ & Hovius SE. An economic evaluation of the use of TNP on full-thickness wounds. Journal of Wound Care 2005, 14: Harding K, Cutting K, Price P. The cost-effectiveness of wound management protocols of care. British Journal of Nursing 2000, 9(19):S6-S KCI Times, Germany 2008 (2) - Internal data on file. United Kingdom KCI Medical Ltd KCI House Langford Business Park Langford Locks Kidlington OX5 1GF United Kingdom 24h Customer Support KCI Advantage Centre Tel +44 (0) Fax +44 (0) kci international head office KCI Europe Holding B.V. Parktoren, 6th Floor Van Heuven Goedhartlaan 11 PO Box AC Amstelveen The Netherlands Tel +31 (0) Fax +31 (0) GLOBAL HEAD OFFICE KCI International 8023 Vantage Drive San Antonio TX U.S.A. T(free) , extension 6335 Tel Fax KCI Licensing, Inc. All Rights Reserved. All trademarks designated herein are property of KCI Licensing, Inc, its affiliates and licensors. Those KCI trademarks designated with the symbol are registered and those designated with TM are considered to be proprietary trademarks or are pending trademark applications in at least one country where this product/ work is commercialized. Most KCI products referred to herein are subject to patents or patent applications. KCI Product code KCII En