P. Rossi, L. Camilloni, A. Todini, A. Fortino, L. D. Bernardo, Leonardo Frigerio, Giacomo Furnari, P. Borgia, G. Guasticchi
{"title":"负压伤口疗法治疗急慢性伤口的卫生技术评估:疗效、安全性、成本效益、组织和伦理影响","authors":"P. Rossi, L. Camilloni, A. Todini, A. Fortino, L. D. Bernardo, Leonardo Frigerio, Giacomo Furnari, P. Borgia, G. Guasticchi","doi":"10.2427/6340","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background : the aim of the study was to assess the safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of negative Pressure wound therapy (nPT) for people with chronic and acute wounds. Methods : the scope and the final draft of the report have been submitted to the stakeholders (producers, payers and patients). safety issues were addressed through a systematic review of the meta-literature. efficacy was addressed through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (rcTs) comparing nPT and other standard therapies in patients with chronic or acute lesions. cost-consequence was analyzed through a systematic review of the existing studies. Results : we retrieved 19 studies, 13 of which were included in the meta-analysis. Many studies had biases that may have resulted in a better performance for nPT. nPT showed: a slightly shorter healing time (-10.4 days, p=0.001), with no heterogeneity, apart from one small study with very positive results, and 40% more patients healed (p=0.002, no heterogeneity).We identified 15 original research papers on nPT costs and cost per outcome. The costs-per-patient- treated varied from +29% to -60%, with several studies reporting savings for nPT. Conclusions : despite serious methodological flaws, the body of evidence available was sufficient to prove some clinical benefit of nPT in severe chronic and acute wound treatment. There is a need for independent and contextualized cost analyses....","PeriodicalId":89162,"journal":{"name":"Italian journal of public health","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Health Technology Assessment of the Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for the treatment of acute and chronic wounds: efficacy, safety, cost effectiveness, organizational and ethical impact\",\"authors\":\"P. Rossi, L. Camilloni, A. Todini, A. Fortino, L. D. Bernardo, Leonardo Frigerio, Giacomo Furnari, P. Borgia, G. Guasticchi\",\"doi\":\"10.2427/6340\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background : the aim of the study was to assess the safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of negative Pressure wound therapy (nPT) for people with chronic and acute wounds. Methods : the scope and the final draft of the report have been submitted to the stakeholders (producers, payers and patients). safety issues were addressed through a systematic review of the meta-literature. efficacy was addressed through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (rcTs) comparing nPT and other standard therapies in patients with chronic or acute lesions. cost-consequence was analyzed through a systematic review of the existing studies. Results : we retrieved 19 studies, 13 of which were included in the meta-analysis. Many studies had biases that may have resulted in a better performance for nPT. nPT showed: a slightly shorter healing time (-10.4 days, p=0.001), with no heterogeneity, apart from one small study with very positive results, and 40% more patients healed (p=0.002, no heterogeneity).We identified 15 original research papers on nPT costs and cost per outcome. The costs-per-patient- treated varied from +29% to -60%, with several studies reporting savings for nPT. Conclusions : despite serious methodological flaws, the body of evidence available was sufficient to prove some clinical benefit of nPT in severe chronic and acute wound treatment. There is a need for independent and contextualized cost analyses....\",\"PeriodicalId\":89162,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Italian journal of public health\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-06-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Italian journal of public health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2427/6340\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Italian journal of public health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2427/6340","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Health Technology Assessment of the Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for the treatment of acute and chronic wounds: efficacy, safety, cost effectiveness, organizational and ethical impact
Background : the aim of the study was to assess the safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of negative Pressure wound therapy (nPT) for people with chronic and acute wounds. Methods : the scope and the final draft of the report have been submitted to the stakeholders (producers, payers and patients). safety issues were addressed through a systematic review of the meta-literature. efficacy was addressed through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (rcTs) comparing nPT and other standard therapies in patients with chronic or acute lesions. cost-consequence was analyzed through a systematic review of the existing studies. Results : we retrieved 19 studies, 13 of which were included in the meta-analysis. Many studies had biases that may have resulted in a better performance for nPT. nPT showed: a slightly shorter healing time (-10.4 days, p=0.001), with no heterogeneity, apart from one small study with very positive results, and 40% more patients healed (p=0.002, no heterogeneity).We identified 15 original research papers on nPT costs and cost per outcome. The costs-per-patient- treated varied from +29% to -60%, with several studies reporting savings for nPT. Conclusions : despite serious methodological flaws, the body of evidence available was sufficient to prove some clinical benefit of nPT in severe chronic and acute wound treatment. There is a need for independent and contextualized cost analyses....