The Cost Effectiveness Of Npwt

1028 Words3 Pages

The first theme is about the cost effectiveness of NPWT. In United Stated there was an estimated $1.7 billion every year for wound management of patients with acute and chronic wounds. (Suissa, Danino and Nikolis 2011). The expenses are expected to rise as the population of aging people increases. NPWT is commonly used in various clinical settings in managing different wound types, which will be either simple or complicated. Nather et al. (2010) noted that to minimise the cost of VAC therapy, an adequate granulation of tissue was required in a wound prior to the application of NPWT, which will provide the affordability in the usage of the VAC therapy. As suggested by Nain et al. (2011) that NPWT is cost-effective in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers because it improves wound closure in a short duration. However, this does not include hospitalisation costs, which can considerably add on to the entire cost of a patient that is undergoing a treatment. In Singapore, the VAC therapy costs $100 each day for an inpatient receiving a treatment (Nather et al. 2010, p. 358). However, according to Ashby et al. (2012, p. 14), ‘NPWT could cost less and be more effective in comparison to other treatments, the decision to use NPWT remains highly uncertain; thus this treatment may not, in fact, be cost-effective’. Meanwhile, the cost was not included in Yao et al. (2012) studies in consideration of the effectiveness of NPWT. However, it is important to include the cost when studying for the reliability of the NPWT. Therefore, an additional study is necessary on the impact of costs in using NPWT.

The second theme is about methods of application. In clinical settings, application of NPWT varies from the thickness of the wound and the type o...

... middle of paper ...

...level of comfort for a patient following the application of an NPWT is considerably important. Two out of three articles used a standard negative pressure applied to the wound or as recommended by the manufacturer’s guidelines, which is -125mmHg (Nather et al. 2010 and Suissa, Danino and Nikolis 2011). While Nain et al. (2011, p. 3) suggested that ‘subatmospheric (negative) pressure was applied within a range of -50mmHg to -125 mmHg intermittently three times a day’. The use of customisable continuous or intermittent pressure therapy will offer patient comfort. In the study of Nather et al. (2010), to accommodate concerns like when the patient started to experience pain or there is an excessive bleeding in the wound, a lower pressure was set from -75 to -100 mmHg. Thus, it is imperative for the patient to have an appropriate action in the treatment of their wound.

Open Document